Decision aids that really promote shared decision making: the pace quickens

Update of the World Health Organization's Mental Health Gap Action Programme Guideline for Psychoses (Including Schizophrenia)

BACKGROUND AND HYPOTHESIS

The World Health Organization's (WHOs) Mental Health Gap Action Programme (mhGAP) aims to improve healthcare for mental, neurological, and substance use disorders in nonspecialized settings, with a focus on low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). mhGAP includes guidelines for the treatment of psychoses (including schizophrenia), which were recently updated in 2023. The complexity of the WHO guideline update process and the updated recommendations on psychoses are presented.

STUDY DESIGN

The WHO guideline development process is outlined as well as the evidence appraisal and the translation of the evidence into recommendations following the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) methodology. The guideline update process includes a review of the literature, a compilation of systematic reviews, and extracting data related to critical and important outcomes. The updated recommendations and the justifying evidence are discussed.

STUDY RESULTS

The WHO mhGAP guidelines for psychoses are adapted to LMICs, and consist of 13 recommendations in 2023, whereof 5 were updated, and 1 recommendation was newly developed. Background information on how these recommendations were obtained, and significant changes since the previous guideline update in 2015 are provided.

CONCLUSIONS

Unlike other guidelines, the WHO must consider various countries, contextual factors, and the WHO Model Lists of Essential Medicines when developing its guidelines. A transformation of the WHO guideline for psychoses into a living guideline would ensure always up-to-date recommendations and facilitate shared decision-making.

A quasi-experimental study about shared decision-making and motivational interviewing on patients with a recent fracture attending Fracture Liaison Services

Shared decision-making (SDM) aims to improve patients' experiences with care, treatment adherence, and health outcomes. However, the effectiveness of SDM in patients with a recent fracture who require anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM) is unclear. The objective of this study was to assess the effectiveness of a multicomponent adherence intervention (MCAI) including a patient decision aid (PDA) and motivational interviewing at Fracture Liaison Services (FLS) on multiple outcomes compared with usual care (UC). This pre-post superiority study included patients with a recent fracture attending FLS and with AOM treatment indication. The primary outcome was 1-year AOM persistence measured by pharmacy records. Secondary outcomes included treatment initiation, AOM adherence (measured by medication possession ratio [MPR]), decision quality (SDM process; 0-100, best), and decisional conflict (0-100, highest conflict), subsequent fractures, and mortality. Outcomes were tested in MCAI and UC groups at the first FLS visit and 4 and 12 months afterwards. Multiple imputation and uni- and multivariable analyses were performed. Post hoc analyses assessed the role of health literacy level. In total, 245 patients (MCAI: n = 136, UC: n = 109) were included. AOM persistence was 80.4% in the MCAI and 76.7% in the UC group (p=.626). SDM process scores were significantly better in MCAI (60.4 vs 55.1; p = .003). AOM initiation (97.8% vs 97.5%), MPR (90.9% vs 88.3%, p=.582), and decisional conflict (21.7 vs 23.0; p = .314) did not differ between groups. Results did not change importantly after adjustment. Stratified analyses by health literacy showed a better effect on MPR and SDM in those with adequate health literacy. This study showed no significant effect on AOM persistence; however, it demonstrated a significant positive effect of MCAI on SDM process in FLS attendees. (Netherlands Trial Registry, Trial NL7236 [NTR7435]; version 1.0; 26-11-2020 https://onderzoekmetmensen.nl/nl/trial/22858).

Development of a patient-centred tool for use in total hip arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

The aim of this project was to develop a tool using the experience of previous patients to inform patient-centred clinical decision-making in the context of total hip arthroplasty (THA). We sought out the patients' views on what is important for them, leveraging registry data, and providing outcome information that is perceived as relevant, understandable, adapted to a specific patient's profile, and readily available.

METHODS

We created the information tool "Patients like me" in four steps. (1) The knowledge basis was the systematically collected detailed exposure and outcome information from the Geneva Arthroplasty Registry established 1996. (2) From the registry we randomly selected 275 patients about to undergo or having already undergone THA and asked them via interviews and a survey which benefits and harms associated with the operation and daily life with the prosthesis they perceived as most important. (3) The identified relevant data (39 predictor candidates, 15 outcomes) were evaluated using Conditional Inference Trees analysis to construct a classification algorithm for each of the 15 outcomes at three different time points/periods. Internal validity of the results was tested using bootstrapping. (4) The tool was designed by and pre-tested with patients over several iterations.

RESULTS

Data from 6836 primary elective THAs operated between 1996 and 2019 were included. The trajectories for the 15 outcomes from the domains pain relief, activity improvement, complication (infection, dislocation, peri-prosthetic fracture) and what to expect in the future (revision surgery, need for contralateral hip replacement) over up to 20 years after surgery were presented for all patients and for specific patient profiles. The tool was adapted to various purposes including individual use, group sessions, patient-clinician interaction and surgeon information to complement the preoperative planning. The pre-test patients' feedback to the tool was unanimously positive. They considered it interesting, clear, complete, and complementary to other information received.

CONCLUSION

The tool based on a survey of patients' perceived concerns and interests and the corresponding long-term data from a large institutional registry makes past patients' experience accessible, understandable, and visible for today's patients and their clinicians. It is a comprehensive illustration of trajectories of relevant outcomes from previous "Patients like me". This principle and methodology can be applied in other medical fields.

Cost-effectiveness of a multicomponent-adherence intervention in fracture liaison services

BACKGROUND

This study aims to assess the lifetime cost-effectiveness of a multi-component adherence intervention (MCAI), including a patient decision aid and motivational interviewing, compared to usual care in patients with a recent fracture attending fracture liaison services (FLS) and eligible for anti-osteoporosis medication (AOM).

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

Data on AOM initiation and one-year persistence were collected from a quasi-experimental study conducted between 2019 and 2023 in two Dutch FLS centers. An individual level, state-transition Markov model was used to simulate lifetime costs and quality-adjusted life years (QALYs) with a societal perspective of MCAI vs usual care. One-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were conducted including variation in additional FLS and MCAI costs (no MCAI cost in baseline).

RESULTS

MCAI was associated with gain in QALYs (0.0012) and reduction in costs (-€16) and is therefore dominant. At the Dutch willingness-to-pay threshold of €50,000/QALY, MCAI remained cost-effective when increasing costs of the FLS visit or the yearly maintenance cost for MCAI up to +€60. Probabilistic sensitivity analysis demonstrated MCAI to be dominant in 54% of the simulations and cost-effective in 87% with a threshold of €50,000/QALY.

CONCLUSIONS

A MCAI implemented in FLS centers may lead to cost-effective allocation of resources in FLS care, depending on extra costs.

A Need for Targeted Teaching of Shared Decision-Making as Identified from an Assessment of Client-Centered Communication Skills Training with Companion Animal Veterinarians

Shared decision-making has been increasingly discussed as a communication practice within veterinary medicine, and it is gaining more traction for diagnostic and treatment planning conversations and specifically offering a spectrum of care. This teaching tip describes the data from an investigation of veterinarians' shared decision-making in a pre-test/post-test communication skills training intervention that used a client-centered, skills-based communication approach. Practice teams from a purposive sample of four companion animal veterinary clinics in Texas participated in a 15-month communication skills intervention, including interactive group workshops and one-on-one communication coaching. To assess the outcome of the intervention, for nine participating veterinarians, appointments recorded pre- (n = 85) and post-intervention (n =  85) were analyzed using the Observer OPTION 5 instrument to assess shared decision-making. The intervention effect was evaluated using mixed logistic regression, adjusting for appointment type. The communication intervention did not significantly impact participating veterinarians' demonstration of shared decision-making (pre = 25.42, n = 55; post = 28.03, n = 56; p = 0.36). Appointment type was significantly associated with veterinarians' OPTION 5 scores (p = .0004) and health problem appointments (OPTION 5 = 30.07) demonstrated greater shared decision-making than preventive care appointments (OPTION 5 = 22.81). Findings suggest that client-centered, skills-based training traditionally used in veterinary curricula and continuing education may not foster the use of shared decision-making, which is a higher-order communication approach that may require a dedicated process-oriented training. This teaching tip highlights the need for a targeted stepwise approach to teach shared decision-making.

Patient Perspectives on a Patient-Facing Tool for Lung Cancer Screening

BACKGROUND

Individuals with high risk for lung cancer may benefit from lung cancer screening, but there are associated risks as well as benefits. Shared decision-making (SDM) tools with personalized information may provide key support for patients. Understanding patient perspectives on educational tools to facilitate SDM for lung cancer screening may support tool development.

AIM

This study aimed to explore patient perspectives related to a SDM tool for lung cancer screening using a qualitative approach.

METHODS

We elicited patient perspectives by showing a provider-facing SDM tool. Focus group interviews that ranged in duration from 1.5 to 2 h were conducted with 23 individuals with high risk for lung cancer. Data were interpreted inductively using thematic analysis to identify patients' thoughts on and desires for a patient-facing SDM tool.

RESULTS

The findings highlight that patients would like to have educational information related to lung cancer screening. We identified several key themes to be considered in the future development of patient-facing tools: barriers to acceptance, preference against screening and seeking empowerment. One further theme illustrated effects of patient-provider relationship as a limitation to meeting lung cancer screening information needs. Participants also noted several suggestions for the design of technology decision aids.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that patients desire additional information on lung cancer screening in advance of clinical visits. However, there are several issues that must be considered in the design and development of technology to meet the information needs of patients for lung cancer screening decisions.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients, service users, caregivers or members of the public were not involved in the study design, conduct, analysis or interpretation of the data. However, clinical experts in health communication provided detailed feedback on the study protocol, including the focus group approach. The study findings contribute to a better understanding of patient expectations for lung cancer screening decisions and may inform future development of tools for SDM.

An Environmental Scan of Tools That Help Individuals Living With Mild Cognitive Impairment or Neurocognitive Disorders Achieve Their Preferred Health or Well-Being

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

Older adults experiencing neurocognitive disease (NCD) contend with complex care often characterized by high emotional strain. Mitigating complex care with decision support tools can clarify options. When used in conjunction with the practice of shared decision making (SDM), these tools can improve satisfaction and confidence in treatment. The use of these tools for cognitive health has increased, but more is needed to understand how these tools incorporate social needs into treatment plans.

RESEARCH DESIGN AND METHODS

We conducted an environmental scan using a MEDLINE-informed search strategy and feedback from an expert steering committee to characterize current tools and approaches for engaging older adults experiencing NCD. We assessed their application and development, incorporation of social determinants, goals or preferences, and inclusion of caregivers in their design.

RESULTS

We identified 11 articles, 7 of which show that SDM helps guide tool development and that most center on clinical decision making. Types of tools varied by clinical site and those differences reflected patient need. A collective value across tools was their use to forge meaningful conversations. Most tools appeared designed without the explicit goal to elicit patient social needs or incorporate nonclinical strategies into treatment plans.

DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS

Several challenges and opportunities exist that center on strategies to engage patients in the design and testing of tools that support conversations with clinicians about cognitive health. Future work should focus on building and testing adaptable tools that support patient and family social care needs beyond clinical care settings.

An online evidence-based dictionary of common adverse events of antidepressants: a new tool to empower patients and clinicians in their shared decision-making process

BACKGROUND

Adverse events (AEs) are commonly reported in clinical studies using the Medical Dictionary for Regulatory Activities (MedDRA), an international standard for drug safety monitoring. However, the technical language of MedDRA makes it challenging for patients and clinicians to share understanding and therefore to make shared decisions about medical interventions. In this project, people with lived experience of depression and antidepressant treatment worked with clinicians and researchers to co-design an online dictionary of AEs associated with antidepressants, taking into account its ease of use and applicability to real-world settings.

METHODS

Through a pre-defined literature search, we identified MedDRA-coded AEs from randomised controlled trials of antidepressants used in the treatment of depression. In collaboration with the McPin Foundation, four co-design workshops with a lived experience advisory panel (LEAP) and one independent focus group (FG) were conducted to produce user-friendly translations of AE terms. Guiding principles for translation were co-designed with McPin/LEAP members and defined before the finalisation of Clinical Codes (CCs, or non-technical terms to represent specific AE concepts). FG results were thematically analysed using the Framework Method.

RESULTS

Starting from 522 trials identified by the search, 736 MedDRA-coded AE terms were translated into 187 CCs, which balanced key factors identified as important to the LEAP and FG (namely, breadth, specificity, generalisability, patient-understandability and acceptability). Work with the LEAP showed that a user-friendly language of AEs should aim to mitigate stigma, acknowledge the multiple levels of comprehension in 'lay' language and balance the need for semantic accuracy with user-friendliness. Guided by these principles, an online dictionary of AEs was co-designed and made freely available ( https://thesymptomglossary.com ). The digital tool was perceived by the LEAP and FG as a resource which could feasibly improve antidepressant treatment by facilitating the accurate, meaningful expression of preferences about potential harms through a shared decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS

This dictionary was developed in English around AEs from antidepressants in depression but it can be adapted to different languages and cultural contexts, and can also become a model for other interventions and disorders (i.e., antipsychotics in schizophrenia). Co-designed digital resources may improve the patient experience by helping to deliver personalised information on potential benefits and harms in an evidence-based, preference-sensitive way.

Technology-supported shared decision-making in chronic conditions: A systematic review of randomized controlled trials

OBJECTIVES

To describe the role of patients with a chronic disease, healthcare professionals (HCPs) and technology in shared decision making (SDM) and the use of clinical decision support systems (CDSSs), and to evaluate the effectiveness of SDM and CDSSs interventions.

METHODS

Randomized controlled studies published between 2011 and 2021 were identified and screened independently by two reviewers, followed by data extraction and analysis. SDM elements and interactive styles were identified to shape the roles of patients, HCPs and technology.

RESULTS

Forty-three articles were identified and reported on 21 SDM-studies, 15 CDSS-studies, 2 studies containing both an SDM-tool and a CDSS, and 5 studies with other decision support components. SDM elements were mostly identified in SDM-tools and interactions styles were least common in the other decision support components.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients within the included RCTs mainly received information from SDM-tools and occasionally CDSSs when it concerns treatment strategies. HCPs provide and clarify information using SDM-tools and CDSSs. Technology provides interactions, which can support more active SDM. SDM-tools mostly showed evidence for positive effects on SDM outcomes, while CDSSs mostly demonstrated positive effects on clinical outcomes.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Technology-supported SDM has potential to optimize SDM when patients, HCPs and technology collaborate well together.

Critical Evaluation of Global Infection Prevention and Control Guidelines for Dentistry Published during the First 2 Years of the COVID-19 Pandemic

Objectives

The outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID-19) encouraged immediate actions by governments and healthcare associations across the world to flatten the curve and prevent health systems from being overburdened. As dentistry comprises aerosol-generating procedures (AGPs), which could increase the risk of infection, various guidelines were issued for dental services which focused on infection prevention and control (IPC) measures for COVID-19. This systematic review focuses on dental IPC guidelines, with the aim of comparing these guidelines against a gold standard.

Method

The Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) 2020 checklist was employed. Predefined inclusion and exclusion criteria were constructed. Information sources comprised Google Scholar, PubMed, and a manual search from December 2019 to December 2021. The Appraisal of Guidelines for Research and Evaluation (AGREE II) instrument was used. Consensus scoring was applied for all guidelines.

Results

A total 61 guidelines were included in the review. The UK national guideline was used as a gold standard as it ranked the highest AGREE score (75 out of 84) and thus was established for comparison with each of the included guidelines. Overall, 40% of the included guidelines had a high consensus score in relation to the UK national guideline.

Conclusion

This systematic review highlighted the variability in content and quality of advice given by different organizations in response to the COVID-19 pandemic in their efforts to reduce SARS-CoV-2 transmission in dentistry. Establishing a single worldwide fast-acting dental organization would ensure that high-quality standardized guidance is available, to enhance health equality and worldwide dental clinical standards.

Physicians' and Patients' Expectations From Digital Agents for Consultations: Interview Study Among Physicians and Patients

BACKGROUND

Physicians are currently overwhelmed by administrative tasks and spend very little time in consultations with patients, which hampers health literacy, shared decision-making, and treatment adherence.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to examine whether digital agents constructed using fast-evolving generative artificial intelligence, such as ChatGPT, have the potential to improve consultations, adherence to treatment, and health literacy. We interviewed patients and physicians to obtain their opinions about 3 digital agents-a silent digital expert, a communicative digital expert, and a digital companion (DC).

METHODS

We conducted in-depth interviews with 25 patients and 22 physicians from a purposeful sample, with the patients having a wide age range and coming from different educational backgrounds and the physicians having different medical specialties. Transcripts of the interviews were deductively coded using MAXQDA (VERBI Software GmbH) and then summarized according to code and interview before being clustered for interpretation.

RESULTS

Statements from patients and physicians were categorized according to three consultation phases: (1) silent and communicative digital experts that are part of the consultation, (2) digital experts that hand over to a DC, and (3) DCs that support patients in the period between consultations. Overall, patients and physicians were open to these forms of digital support but had reservations about all 3 agents.

CONCLUSIONS

Ultimately, we derived 9 requirements for designing digital agents to support consultations, treatment adherence, and health literacy based on the literature and our qualitative findings.

Women's preferences for less active ectopic pregnancy treatment: A discrete choice experiment

RESEARCH QUESTION

Shared decision-making has become a hallmark of quality care and is increasingly spotlighted in practice guidelines. Little is known about women's views for treatment of less active ectopic pregnancy. What are the preferences of women for less active ectopic pregnancy treatment-related attributes?

DESIGN

A discrete choice model with 8 attributes depicting ectopic pregnancy treatment including varying levels of first-line treatment effectiveness, length of hospitalization, cost, length of sick leave, of convalescence, need for surgical management, for emergency care during convalescence and for tube removal was used. Childbearing aged women, i.e. those who might experience an ectopic pregnancy in the future, were recruited. They were asked to choose between hypothetical treatments in 18 choice tasks with different levels of all treatment attributes. A conditional logit McFadden's choice model was performed. The main outcome measure was preference weights for less active ectopic pregnancy treatment-related attributes.

RESULTS

A total of 5770 observations from 178 women were analysed. The attributes displaying the highest marginal impacts on women's decisions included: higher rate of first-line treatment effectiveness, lower rate of tube removal, lower rate of surgical management, shorter length of hospitalization and, to a lesser extent, but still significant, shorter length of convalescence, absence of risk of emergency care during convalescence and lower cost.

CONCLUSIONS

Trade-offs made by women between the attributes of less active ectopic pregnancy treatment suggest that no treatment option, either medical or surgical, is an obvious preferred option. These results encourage the promotion of shared decision-making.

Clinician Perceptions on Using Decision Tools to Support Prediction-Based Shared Decision Making for Lung Cancer Screening

Background

Considering a patient's full risk factor profile can promote personalized shared decision making (SDM). One way to accomplish this is through encounter tools that incorporate prediction models, but little is known about clinicians' perceptions of the feasibility of using these tools in practice. We examined how clinicians react to using one such encounter tool for personalizing SDM about lung cancer screening (LCS).

Design

We conducted a qualitative study based on field notes from academic detailing visits during a multisite quality improvement program. The detailer engaged one-on-one with 96 primary care clinicians across multiple Veterans Affairs sites (7 medical centers and 6 outlying clinics) to get feedback on 1) the rationale for prediction-based LCS and 2) how to use the DecisionPrecision (DP) encounter tool with eligible patients to personalize LCS discussions.

Results

Thematic content analysis from detailing visit data identified 6 categories of clinician willingness to use the DP tool to personalize SDM for LCS (adoption potential), varying from "Enthusiastic Potential Adopter" (n = 18) to "Definite Non-Adopter" (n = 16). Many clinicians (n = 52) articulated how they found the concept of prediction-based SDM highly appealing. However, to varying degrees, nearly all clinicians identified challenges to incorporating such an approach in routine practice.

Limitations

The results are based on the clinician's initial reactions rather than longitudinal experience.

Conclusions

While many primary care clinicians saw real value in using prediction to personalize LCS decisions, more support is needed to overcome barriers to using encounter tools in practice. Based on these findings, we propose several strategies that may facilitate the adoption of prediction-based SDM in contexts such as LCS.

Highlights

Encounter tools that incorporate prediction models promote personalized shared decision making (SDM), but little is known about clinicians' perceptions of the feasibility of using these tools in practice.We examined how clinicians react to using one such encounter tool for personalizing SDM about lung cancer screening (LCS).While many clinicians found the concept of prediction-based SDM highly appealing, nearly all clinicians identified challenges to incorporating such an approach in routine practice.We propose several strategies to overcome adoption barriers and facilitate the use of prediction-based SDM in contexts such as LCS.

Provider perspectives on a point-of-care tool to facilitate patient-centered contraceptive care among Latina/x patients in Baltimore, MD

Objectives

To explore clinician perspectives on the development, utility, and feasibility of a provider-facing point-of-care tool to assist in provision of patient-centered contraceptive care for Latina/x patients in Baltimore, MD.

Methods

We conducted 25 semi-structured qualitative interviews with a sample of clinicians who provide contraceptive care to Latina/x patients. An interview guide was developed based on prior research related to patient-centered care and extant point-of-care tools. Transcripts were independently coded by two study team members and analyzed using a directed content analysis approach.

Results

Four themes emerged from the data: (1) clinician perception of a need for a tool to facilitate patient-centered contraceptive care, (2) concern for tool burden and burnout, (3) desire for tool ease of use, and (4) a need for cultural awareness during tool development to avoid bias and typecasting.

Conclusions

A provider-facing, point-of-care tool to facilitate patient-centered contraceptive counseling was acceptable among providers, provided the tool is easy to use and promotes cultural awareness.

Innovation

In the current era of more limited reproductive choice across the U.S., the need and support for non-coercive, patient-centered contraceptive care is timely. A provider-facing, point-of-care tool can facilitate the provision of patient-centered care among clinicians proving contraceptive counseling to Latina/s.

Prevalence and predictors of shared decision-making in goals-of-care clinician-family meetings for critically ill neurologic patients: a multi-center mixed-methods study

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is a joint process where patients, or their surrogates, and clinicians make health choices based on evidence and preferences. We aimed to determine the extent and predictors of shared decision-making for goals-of-care discussions for critically ill neurological patients, which is crucial for patient-goal-concordant care but currently unknown.

METHODS

We analyzed 72 audio-recorded routine clinician-family meetings during which goals-of-care were discussed from seven US hospitals. These occurred for 67 patients with 72 surrogates and 29 clinicians; one hospital provided 49/72 (68%) of the recordings. Using a previously validated 10-element shared decision-making instrument, we quantified the extent of shared decision-making in each meeting. We measured clinicians' and surrogates' characteristics and prognostic estimates for the patient's hospital survival and 6-month independent function using post-meeting questionnaires. We calculated clinician-family prognostic discordance, defined as ≥ 20% absolute difference between the clinician's and surrogate's estimates. We applied mixed-effects regression to identify independent associations with greater shared decision-making.

RESULTS

The median shared decision-making score was 7 (IQR 5-8). Only 6% of meetings contained all 10 shared decision-making elements. The most common elements were "discussing uncertainty"(89%) and "assessing family understanding"(86%); least frequent elements were "assessing the need for input from others"(36%) and "eliciting the context of the decision"(33%). Clinician-family prognostic discordance was present in 60% for hospital survival and 45% for 6-month independent function. Univariate analyses indicated associations between greater shared decision-making and younger clinician age, fewer years in practice, specialty (medical-surgical critical care > internal medicine > neurocritical care > other > trauma surgery), and higher clinician-family prognostic discordance for hospital survival. After adjustment, only higher clinician-family prognostic discordance for hospital survival remained independently associated with greater shared decision-making (p = 0.029).

CONCLUSION

Fewer than 1 in 10 goals-of-care clinician-family meetings for critically ill neurological patients contained all shared decision-making elements. Our findings highlight gaps in shared decision-making. Interventions promoting shared decision-making for high-stakes decisions in these patients may increase patient-value congruent care; future studies should also examine whether they will affect decision quality and surrogates' health outcomes.

The impact of adding cost information to a conversation aid to support shared decision making about low-risk prostate cancer treatment: Results of a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial

BACKGROUND

Decision aids help patients consider the benefits and drawbacks of care options but rarely include cost information. We assessed the impact of a conversation-based decision aid containing information about low-risk prostate cancer management options and their relative costs.

METHODS

We conducted a stepped-wedge cluster randomised trial in outpatient urology practices within a US-based academic medical center. We randomised five clinicians to four intervention sequences and enroled patients newly diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer. Primary patient-reported outcomes collected postvisit included the frequency of cost conversations and referrals to address costs. Other patient-reported outcomes included: decisional conflict postvisit and at 3 months, decision regret at 3 months, shared decision-making postvisit, financial toxicity postvisit and at 3 months. Clinicians reported their attitudes about shared decision-making pre- and poststudy, and the intervention's feasibility and acceptability. We used hierarchical regression analysis to assess patient outcomes. The clinician was included as a random effect; fixed effects included education, employment, telehealth versus in-person visit, visit date, and enrolment period.

RESULTS

Between April 2020 and March 2022, we screened 513 patients, contacted 217 eligible patients, and enroled 117/217 (54%) (51 in usual care, 66 in the intervention group). In adjusted analyses, the intervention was not associated with cost conversations (β = .82, p = .27), referrals to cost-related resources (β = -0.36, p = .81), shared decision-making (β = -0.79, p = .32), decisional conflict postvisit (β = -0.34, p= .70), or at follow-up (β = -2.19, p = .16), decision regret at follow-up (β = -9.76, p = .11), or financial toxicity postvisit (β = -1.32, p = .63) or at follow-up (β = -2.41, p = .23). Most clinicians and patients had positive attitudes about the intervention and shared decision-making. In exploratory unadjusted analyses, patients in the intervention group experienced more transient indecision (p < .02) suggesting increased deliberation between visit and follow-up.

DISCUSSION

Despite enthusiasm from clinicians, the intervention was not significantly associated with hypothesised outcomes, though we were unable to robustly test outcomes due to recruitment challenges. Recruitment at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic impacted eligibility, sample size/power, study procedures, and increased telehealth visits and financial worry, independent of the intervention. Future work should explore ways to support shared decision-making, cost conversations, and choice deliberation with a larger sample. Such work could involve additional members of the care team, and consider the detail, quality, and timing of addressing these issues.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients and clinicians were engaged as stakeholder advisors meeting monthly throughout the duration of the project to advise on the study design, measures selected, data interpretation, and dissemination of study findings.

Digital encounter decision aids linked to clinical practice guidelines: results from user testing SHARE-IT decision aids in primary care

BACKGROUND

Encounter decision aids (EDAs) are tools that can support shared decision making (SDM), up to the clinical encounter. However, adoption of these tools has been limited, as they are hard to produce, to keep up-to-date, and are not available for many decisions. The MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation has created a new generation of decision aids that are generically produced along digitally structured guidelines and evidence summaries, in an electronic authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp). We explored general practitioners' (GPs) and patients' experiences with five selected decision aids linked to BMJ Rapid Recommendations in primary care.

METHODS

We applied a qualitative user testing design to evaluate user experiences for both GPs and patients. We translated five EDAs relevant to primary care, and observed the clinical encounters of 11 GPs when they used the EDA with their patients. We conducted a semi-structured interview with each patient after the consultation and a think-aloud interview with each GPs after multiple consultations. We used the Qualitative Analysis Guide (QUAGOL) for data analysis.

RESULTS

Direct observations and user testing analysis of 31 clinical encounters showed an overall positive experience. The EDAs created better involvement in decision making and resulted in meaningful insights for patients and clinicians. The design and its interactive, multilayered structure made the tool enjoyable and well-organized. Difficult terminology, scales and numbers hindered understanding of certain information, which was sometimes perceived as too specialized or even intimidating. GPs thought the EDA was not suitable for every patient. They perceived a learning curve was required and the need for time investment was a concern. The EDAs were considered trustworthy as they were provided by a credible source.

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that EDAs can be useful tools in primary care by supporting actual shared decision making and enhancing patient involvement. The graphical approach and clear representation help patients better understand their options. To overcome barriers such as health literacy and GPs attitudes, effort is still needed to make the EDAs as accessible, intuitive and inclusive as possible through use of plain language, uniform design, rapid access and training.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study protocol was approved by the The Research Ethics Committee UZ/KU Leuven (Belgium) on 31-10-2019 with reference number MP011977.

Evaluation of Health-Related Values and Preferences of Adults Who Were Preterm Infants and Parents of Preterm Infants Concerning Use of Prophylactic Cyclooxygenase Inhibitor Drugs

IMPORTANCE

There is wide variability in the use of prophylactic cyclooxygenase inhibitor (COX-I) drugs to prevent morbidity and mortality in preterm infants. Parents of preterm infants are rarely involved in this decision-making process.

OBJECTIVE

To explore the health-related values and preferences of adults who were preterm infants and families of preterm infants concerning the prophylactic use of indomethacin, ibuprofen, and acetaminophen initiated within the first 24 hours after birth.

DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS

This cross-sectional study used direct choice experiments conducted in 2 phases of virtual video-conferenced interviews between March 3, 2021, and February 10, 2022: (1) a pilot feasibility study and (2) a formal study of values and preferences, using a predefined convenience sample. Participants included adults born very preterm (gestational age <32 weeks) or parents of very preterm infants currently in the neonatal intensive care unit (NICU) or having graduated from the NICU in the last 5 years.

MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES

Relative importance of clinical outcomes, willingness to use each of the COX-Is when presented as the only option, preference for using prophylactic hydrocortisone vs indomethacin, willingness to use any of the COX-Is when all 3 options are available, and relative importance of having family values and preferences included in decision-making.

RESULTS

Of 44 participants enrolled, 40 were included in the formal study (31 parents and 9 adults born preterm). The median gestational age of the participant or the participant's child at birth was 26.0 (IQR, 25.0-28.8) weeks. Death (median score, 100 [IQR, 100-100]) and severe intraventricular hemorrhage (IVH) (median score, 90.0 [IQR, 80.0-100]) were rated as the 2 most critical outcomes. Based on direct choice experiments, most participants were willing to consider prophylactic indomethacin (36 [90.0%]) or ibuprofen (34 [85.0%]), but not acetaminophen (4 [10.0%]) when offered as the only option. Among participants who initially chose indomethacin (n = 36), if prophylactic hydrocortisone was offered as a potential therapy with the caveat that both cannot be used simultaneously, only 12 of 36 (33.3%) preferred to remain with indomethacin. Variability in preference was noted when all 3 COX-I options were available, indomethacin (19 [47.5%]) being the most preferred option followed by ibuprofen (16 [40.0%]), while the remainder opted for no prophylaxis (5 [12.5%]).

CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE

The findings of this cross-sectional study of former preterm infants and parents of preterm infants suggest that there was minimal variability in how participants valued the main outcomes, with death and severe IVH being rated as the 2 most important undesirable outcomes. While indomethacin was the most preferred form of prophylaxis, variability was noted in the choice of COX-I interventions when participants were presented with the benefits and harms of each drug.

Decision Aids for Decision Making about Locally Advance Breast Cancer: A Systematic Review

Locally advanced breast cancer (LABC) is a subset of breast cancer with locoregional progression without distant metastasis. The multimodality treatment (surgery, chemotherapy, radiotherapy, hormonal and targeted therapy if required) could significantly improve results in this specific group of patients. The complex and multiple options of treatment with similar mortality rates but different outcomes depending on the patient's desires, preferences and social environment require aid to facilitate the individual patient's decisions (e.g. Decision Aids (DAs) targeting patients considering primary or adjuvant treatment in LABC). In this context, DAs have been proven fundamental to help patients and clinicians share and agree on the best value option. The current systematic review aimed to evaluate the existing DAs related to these patients with LABC and identify current status and possible improvement areas (possible scarcity and heterogeneity of instruments, the status of their development, explanation of their purpose,…). No previous systematic reviews have been published on this topic. Following Prospero registration no: CRD42021286173, studies about LABC DAs were identified, without data or language restrictions, through a systematic search of bibliographic databases in December 2021. Quality was assessed using Qualsyst criteria (range 0.0-1.0). The quality of the 17 selected studies ranged from 0.46 to 0.95. Of them, 14/17 (82%) were DAs about treatment, only one (6%) about diagnosis, and 2/17 (12%) about the employment of DAs. No screening or follow-up DAs were retrieved. Twelve (70.6%) DAs were online tools. They varied broadly regarding their characteristics and purposes. Most of the studies focused on developing and testing different DAs (5/17; 29.4%) and their impact (7/17; 41.2%). Only 4/17 (23.5%) analysed their implementation and cost. These instruments have proven to improve patient's knowledge and decision-making, decrease patient anxiety, and patients tend to undergo treatment. However, nowadays, there is still a need for further research and consensus on methodology to develop practical DAs.

[Synthesis of evidence and recommendations: guidelines for cervical cancer screening, detection, and treatmentSíntese de evidências e recomendações: diretrizes para rastreamento, detecção e tratamento do câncer do colo do útero]

Objectives

Synthesize the recommendations developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) for the screening and treatment of women with pre-cancerous lesions for cervical cancer prevention, with a view to improving the quality of care and health outcomes.

Methods

The guidelines prepared by WHO follow the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation) method for the preparation of guidelines, as set forth in the WHO Handbook for Guideline Development. A synthesis of the recommendations of two WHO guidelines was carried out. Additionally, a systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Lilacs, Mhealth Systems Evidence, Epistemonikos and gray literature of studies developed in the Americas to identify barriers, facilitators, implementation strategies, and indicators.

Results

A total of 19 recommendations and ten good practices were formulated for screening pre-cancerous lesions of the cervix and treating cervical cancer. Implementation barriers and facilitators were identified, and indicators were created for assessing adherence and outcomes.

Conclusions

The recommendations provide guidance for the screening and treatment of women with pre-cancerous lesions for cervical cancer prevention, with a view to improving the quality of care and health outcomes. Implementation in Latin America and the Caribbean is considered.

Encounter glaucoma decision Aid trial

PURPOSE

A decision aid facilitates patient engagement in the decision-making process in ophthalmic practice. In particular, patients with open-angle glaucoma will benefit from such an intervention as it enhances their knowledge, compliance, and satisfaction with the healthcare services.

METHODS

The Encounter Glaucoma Decision Aid (GDA) was delivered to 145 patients with open-angle glaucoma at the King Khaled Eye Specialist Hospital. Evaluation was done using a pre-validated, semi-structured questionnaire. We compared the patients' knowledge, compliance, and decision conflict scale at baseline, before receiving Encounter GDA, and again three months later.

RESULTS

The average age of the participants was 56.82 years. Most of the participants were male (67.6%). The mean duration since the participants were diagnosed with glaucoma was 9.39 years. After using Encounter GDA, 80% of participants had a statistically significant improvement in their level of knowledge, moving from poor to good (P = 0.001). There was also a statistically significant increase in adherence to medication, from 41.4% to 65.5% (P = 0.001). The decision conflict score decreased significantly after using Encounter GDA (before it was 60.94 ± 21.60 vs. after 19.18 ± 17.83).

CONCLUSION

Using GDA cards as an educational measure has a significant effect on improving patient's knowledge and adherence to medications.

Patient views on asthma diagnosis and how a clinical decision support system could help: A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

Making a diagnosis of asthma can be challenging for clinicians and patients. A clinical decision support system (CDSS) for use in primary care including a patient-facing mode, could change how information is shared between patients and healthcare professionals and improve the diagnostic process.

METHODS

Participants diagnosed with asthma within the last 5 years were recruited from general practices across four UK regions. In-depth interviews were used to explore patient experiences relating to their asthma diagnosis and to understand how a CDSS could be used to improve the diagnostic process for patients. Interviews were audio recorded, transcribed verbatim and analysed using a thematic approach.

RESULTS

Seventeen participants (12 female) undertook interviews, including 14 individuals and 3 parents of children with asthma. Being diagnosed with asthma was generally considered an uncertain process. Participants felt a lack of consultation time and poor communication affected their understanding of asthma and what to expect. Had the nature of asthma and the steps required to make a diagnosis been explained more clearly, patients felt their understanding and engagement in asthma self-management could have been improved. Participants considered that a CDSS could provide resources to support the diagnostic process, prompt dialogue, aid understanding and support shared decision-making.

CONCLUSION

Undergoing an asthma diagnosis was uncertain for patients if their ideas and concerns were not addressed by clinicians and were influenced by a lack of consultation time and limitations in communication. An asthma diagnosis CDSS could provide structure and an interface to prompt dialogue, provide visuals about asthma to aid understanding and encourage patient involvement.

PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Prespecified semistructured interview topic guides (young person and adult versions) were developed by the research team and piloted with members of the Asthma UK Centre for Applied Research Patient and Public Involvement (PPI) group. Findings were regularly discussed within the research group and with PPI colleagues to aid the interpretation of data.

Síntesis de evidencia y recomendaciones: directrices para la profilaxis antibiótica y la elección de antisépticos en las mujeres con parto vaginal instrumentado o cesárea

Introducción.

Las infecciones y la sepsis materna durante o después del parto aumentan la mortalidad materna y provocan una carga alta de enfermedad en la Región de las Américas. El riesgo de infección después de la cesárea y el parto instrumentado puede ser reducido mediante el uso de antisépticos cutáneos y profilaxis antibiótica apropiados.

Objetivos.

Sintetizar las recomendaciones desarrolladas por la Organización Mundial de la Salud (OMS) con el fin de mejorar la calidad del cuidado y los desenlaces en salud relacionados con la profilaxis antibiótica de rutina en mujeres con parto vaginal instrumentado, la profilaxis antibiótica de rutina en mujeres con parto por cesárea, la elección de antisépticos y el método de aplicación para la preparación de la piel antes de una cesárea, y la irrigación vaginal con antisépticos en las mujeres en quienes se realiza una cesárea.

Métodos.

Las directrices elaboradas por la OMS siguieron los métodos de elaboración de la directriz GRADE (Grading of Recommendations Assessment Development and Evaluation) del Manual para el desarrollo de directrices de la OMS. Se llevó a cabo una síntesis de las recomendaciones de cuatro directrices de la OMS. Adicionalmente, se realizó una búsqueda sistemática en PubMed, Lilacs, Health Systems Evidence, Epistemonikos y literatura gris de estudios desarrollados en las Américas para identificar barreras, facilitadores y estrategias de implementación, y para establecer indicadores.

Resultados.

Se formularon cinco recomendaciones para la profilaxis antibiótica de rutina en mujeres con parto vaginal instrumentado, la profilaxis antibiótica de rutina en mujeres con parto por cesárea, la elección de antisépticos y el método de aplicación para la preparación de la piel antes de una cesárea, y la irrigación vaginal con antisépticos en las mujeres que tienen una cesárea. Se identificaron barreras y facilitadores para la implementación, y se crearon indicadores de adherencia y resultado.

Conclusiones.

Las recomendaciones formuladas proveen orientación para mejorar la calidad del cuidado y los desenlaces en salud relacionados con la profilaxis antibiótica y la elección de antisépticos en las mujeres con parto vaginal instrumentado o cesárea.

Lumbar Fusion Surgery for Patients With Back Pain and Degenerative Disc Disease: An Observational Study From the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network

STUDY DESIGN

Uncontrolled retrospective observational study.

OBJECTIVES

Surgery for patients with back pain and degenerative disc disease is controversial, and studies to date have yielded conflicting results. We evaluated the effects of lumbar fusion surgery for patients with this indication in the Canadian Spine Outcomes and Research Network (CSORN).

METHODS

We analyzed data that were prospectively collected from consecutive patients at 11 centers between 2015 and 2019. Our primary outcome was change in patient-reported back pain at 12 months of follow-up, and our secondary outcomes were satisfaction, disability, health-related quality of life, and rates of adverse events.

RESULTS

Among 84 patients, we observed a statistically significant improvement of back pain at 12 months that exceeded the threshold of Minimum Clinically Important Difference (MCID) (mean change -3.7 points, SD 2.6, p < 0.001, MCID = 1.2; 77% achieved MCID), and 81% reported being "somewhat" or "extremely" satisfied. We also observed improvements of Oswestry Disability Index (-17.3, SD 16.6), Short Form-12 Physical Component Summary (10.3, SD 9.6) and Short Form-12 Mental Component Summary (3.1, SD 8.3); all p < 0.001). The overall rate of adverse events was 19%.

CONCLUSIONS

Among a highly selective group of patients undergoing lumbar fusion surgery for degenerative disc disease, most experienced a clinically significant improvement of back pain as well as significant improvements of disability and health-related quality of life, with high satisfaction at 1 year of follow-up. These findings suggest that surgery for this indication may provide some benefit, and that further research is warranted.

[Synthesis of evidence and recommendations: guidelines for the pharmacological treatment of arterial hypertension in adultsSíntese de evidências e recomendações: diretrizes para o tratamento farmacológico da hipertensão arterial em adultos]

Introduction

Arterial hypertension (high blood pressure) is one of the most prevalent chronic noncommunicable diseases. It is a cause of cardiovascular disease and is the leading attributable cause of death in the Region of the Americas.

Objectives

Synthesize the recommendations developed by the World Health Organization (WHO) to improve the quality of care and health outcomes of adults with high blood pressure, and address aspects of implementing these recommendations.

Methods

A synthesis was conducted of the recommendations contained in the WHO Guideline for the pharmacological treatment of hypertension in adults. In addition, a systematic search for studies carried out in the Region of the Americas was conducted in PubMed, Lilacs, Health Systems Evidence, Epistemonikos, and gray literature in order to identify barriers, facilitators, and implementation strategies.

Results

Ten recommendations were made for adults with high blood pressure. Implementation barriers, facilitators, and strategies were identified, and indicators were created for assessing treatment adherence and outcomes.

Conclusions

The formulated recommendations aim to provide guidance on how to approach the pharmacological treatment of hypertension in adults, except pregnant women, as well as considerations for implementation of the recommendations in Latin America and the Caribbean.

Estimating conditional vaccine effectiveness

Vaccine effectiveness for COVID-19 is typically estimated for different outcomes that often are hierarchical in severity (e.g. any documented infection, symptomatic infection, hospitalization, death) and subsets of each other. Conditional effectiveness for a more severe outcome conditional on a less severe outcome is the protection offered against the severe outcome (e.g. death) among those who already sustained the less severe outcome (e.g. documented infection). The concept applies also to the protection offered by previous infection rather than vaccination. Formulas and a nomogram are provided here for calculating conditional effectiveness. Illustrative examples are presented from recent vaccine effectiveness studies, including situations where effectiveness for different outcomes changed at different pace over time. E(death | documented infection) is the percent decrease in the case fatality rate and E(death | infection) is the percent decrease in the infection fatality rate (IFR). Conditional effectiveness depends on many factors and should not be misinterpreted as a causal effect estimate. However, it may be used for better personalized communication of the benefits of vaccination, considering also IFR and epidemic activity in public health decision-making and communication.

Fuzzy constraint-based agent negotiation framework for doctor-patient shared decision-making

BACKGROUND

The clinical practice of shared decision-making (SDM) has grown in importance. However, most studies on SDM practice concentrated on providing auxiliary knowledge from the third-party standpoint without consideration for the value preferences of doctors and patients. The essences of these methods are complete and manual negotiation, and the problems of high cost, time consumption, delayed response, and decision fatigue are serious.

METHODS

In response to the above limitations, this article proposes a fuzzy constraint-directed agent-based negotiation and recommendation framework for bilateral and multi-issue preference negotiation in SDM (PN-SDM). Its purpose is to provide preference information and intellectualize PN-SDM to promote SDM practice. We modeled PN-SDM problems as distributed fuzzy constraint satisfaction problems and designed the doctor agent and patient agent to negotiate on behalf of the doctor and patient. The negotiation result was then transformed into treatment plans by the recommendation model. The proposed negotiation and recommendation models were introduced in detail by an instance.

RESULTS

The proposed method with different strategies and negotiation pairs achieves good performance in terms of negotiation running time, negotiation rounds, and combined aggregated satisfaction value. Specifically, it can feasibly and effectively complete multiple rounds of PN-SDM in a few seconds and obtain higher satisfaction.

CONCLUSION

The experimental results indicate that the negotiation model can effectively simulate preference negotiation and relieve the pressure of increasing issues. The recommendation model can assist in decision-making and help to realize SDM. In addition, it can flexibly cope with various negotiation scenarios by using different negotiation strategies (e.g., collaborative, win-win, and competitive).

Development of an online patient decision aid for kidney failure treatment modality decisions

BACKGROUND

Patient decision aids (PtDAs) support patients and clinicians in shared decision-making (SDM). Real-world outcome information may improve patients' risk perception, and help patients make decisions congruent with their expectations and values. Our aim was to develop an online PtDA to support kidney failure treatment modality decision-making, that: 1) provides patients with real-world outcome information, and 2) facilitates SDM in clinical practice.

METHODS

The International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) development process model was complemented with a user-centred and convergent mixed-methods approach. Rapid prototyping was used to develop the PtDA with a multidisciplinary steering group in an iterative process of co-creation. The results of an exploratory evidence review and a needs-assessment among patients, caregivers, and clinicians were used to develop the PtDA. Seven Dutch teaching hospitals and two national Dutch outcome registries provided real-world data on selected outcomes for all kidney failure treatment modalities. Alpha and beta testing were performed to assess the prototype and finalise development. An implementation strategy was developed to guide implementation of the PtDA in clinical practice.

RESULTS

The 'Kidney Failure Decision Aid' consists of three components designed to help patients and clinicians engage in SDM: 1) a paper hand-out sheet, 2) an interactive website, and 3) a personal summary sheet. A 'patients-like-me' infographic was developed to visualise survival probabilities for each treatment modality on the website. Other treatment outcomes were incorporated as event rates (e.g. hospitalisation rates) or explained in text (e.g. the flexibility of each treatment modality). No major revisions were needed after alpha and beta testing. During beta testing, some patients ignored the survival probabilities because they considered these too confronting. Nonetheless, patients agreed that every patient has the right to choose whether they want to view this information. Patients and clinicians believed that the PtDA would help patients make informed decisions, and that it would support values- and preferences-based decision-making. Implementation of the PtDA has started in October 2020.

CONCLUSIONS

The 'Kidney Failure Decision Aid' was designed to facilitate SDM in clinical practice and contains real-world outcome information on all kidney failure treatment modalities. It is currently being investigated for its effects on SDM in a clinical trial.

Decision aids linked to the recommendations in clinical practice guidelines: results of the acceptability of a decision aid for patients with generalized anxiety disorder

Background

Generalized anxiety disorder (GAD) is one of the most prevalent mental health problems. Patients with GAD have unmet needs related to the information received about their disorder, its treatments and their participation in the decision-making process. The aim of this study is to develop and assess the acceptability of a patient decision aid (PtDA) for patients with GAD.

Method

The PtDA was developed following the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. The recommendations of the Spanish clinical practice guideline (CPG) for patients with GAD were used as the basis. The first prototype was developed by an expert committee, further improvements were made with patients (n = 2), clinical experts (n = 13) and the project management group (n = 7). The acceptability of this second draft was assessed by patients non-involved in the previous phases (n = 11).

Results

The final PtDA version included a brief description of GAD and its treatments. Most participants agreed that the PtDA was easy to use, visually appealing and useful. At least half of the participants learned new things about treatments and adverse effects.

Conclusions

A PtDA was developed for patients with GAD based on recommendations from the Spanish CPG. It was improved and accepted by patients and clinical experts involved. An evaluation of its effectiveness on the shared decision-making process during the clinical encounter is planned.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-022-01899-2.

Shared decision making in primary care: Process evaluation of the intervention in the OPTIMAL study, a cluster randomised trial

AIMS

To analyse the performance of a Shared Decision Making (SDM) intervention, we assessed perceived and experienced SDM in General Practitioners (GPs) and patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM).

METHODS

Cluster-Randomised Controlled Trial (cRCT) testing the effect of a decision aid. Opinions and experienced role regarding SDM were assessed in 72 patients and 18 GPs with the SDM-Q-9 (range 0-45) and Control Preferences Scale (CPS, 0-5), and observed SDM with the OPTION5 (0-20). SDM at baseline was compared to 24 months' follow-up using paired t-tests.

RESULTS

At baseline, perceived levels of SDM did not significantly differ between GPs and patients with T2DM (difference of 2.3, p = 0.24). At follow-up, mean patients' perceived level of SDM was 7.9 lower compared to baseline (p < 0.01), whereas GPs' opinions had not changed significantly. After both visits, mean CPS scores differed significantly between patients and GPs. OPTION5 scores ranged between 6 and 20.

CONCLUSION

Patients and GPs perceived similar baseline levels of SDM. Two years later, patients perceived less SDM, while GPs did not change their opinion. SDM was appropriate immediately after training, but perhaps GPs fell back in old habits over time. We recommend repeated SDM training.

New status report from Norway: Implementation of patient involvement in Norwegian health care

In Norway, shared decision-making (SDM) is on the top of the priorities announced by the health authorities. Accountability for implementing this priority has been delegated to the four health regions, and from there into particular departments, hospital trusts, working groups or SDM coordinators. Using abundant public funding, different approaches to producing and implementing patient decision aids have been developed. However, none of these is implemented by any Norwegian services on a regular basis, while the accessible decision aids on the national health platform are not quality approved and in very little use. An ongoing new project is aimed to resolve this dilemma. Health professional training has been developed as a meta-curriculum with multiple modules, adaptive to setting and user group, and designed as an open-source learning platform, based upon the experience of "SDM Ambassadors" delivering the training. Most of the modules are already implemented on a regular basis in the South-Eastern Health Region, and 5000 health care professionals have already graduated from the training modules. However, in the standard patient pathways, and in most of the national medical guidelines, the patient is still considered to be a passive receiver of directives or recommendations, rather than an active participant in their own health decisions. Considerable structural implementation has been done in the education guidelines of all health professions on all levels to embed SDM principles. Teaching in SDM skills, quality of information and evidence-based nursing has become standard in most of the programs at Norwegian universities. Nevertheless, we currently still have no reliable estimate on the degree to which patients are actually involved in their own health decision-making. Further efforts in the process of implementing the patient's choice in the health system should involve the municipal services, follow a research-based strategy, include monitoring and consider the quality level of the informational environment of health-related decisions.

How are patient-related characteristics associated with shared decision-making about treatment? A scoping review of quantitative studies

OBJECTIVES

To identify what patient-related characteristics have been reported to be associated with the occurrence of shared decision-making (SDM) about treatment.

DESIGN

Scoping review.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Peer-reviewed articles in English or Dutch reporting on associations between patient-related characteristics and the occurrence of SDM for actual treatment decisions.

INFORMATION SOURCES

COCHRANE Library, Embase, MEDLINE, PsycInfo, PubMed and Web of Science were systematically searched for articles published until 25 March 2019.

RESULTS

The search yielded 5289 hits of which 53 were retained. Multiple categories of patient characteristics were identified: (1) sociodemographic characteristics (eg, gender), (2) general health and clinical characteristics (eg, symptom severity), (3) psychological characteristics and coping with illness (eg, self-efficacy) and (4) SDM style or preference. Many characteristics showed no association or unclear relationships with SDM occurrence. For example, for female gender positive, negative and, most frequently, non-significant associations were seen.

CONCLUSIONS

A large variety of patient-related characteristics have been studied, but for many the association with SDM occurrence remains unclear. The results will caution often-made assumptions about associations and provide an important step to target effective interventions to foster SDM with all patients.

Healthcare professionals' views on factors influencing shared decision-making in primary health care centres in Saudi Arabia: A qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

To describe the perspectives of healthcare professionals regarding the implementation of Shared decision-making (SDM) in primary healthcare centres (PHCCs) in Saudi Arabia.

METHODS

Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with a purposive and snowball sample of healthcare professionals in PHCCs. Interviews have been recorded, transcribed, translated and thematically analysed. Themes were mapped to the COM-B model.

RESULTS

Sixteen healthcare professionals were interviewed. The data analysis identified six themes and 14 sub-themes. The six themes are patient related factors, health professional related factors, environmental context and resources, patient-physician communication, patient-physician preferences toward SDM and physicians' perceived value and benefits of SDM. Physicians are unlikely to practice SDM in the context of time pressures, shortage of physicians, lack of treatment options, and decision-making aids. The findings also underscored the importance of building a trustworthy physician-patient relationship through the use of effective conversation techniques.

CONCLUSIONS

There are multiple barriers to SDM in primary care. Unless these barriers are addressed, it is unlikely that physicians will effectively or fully engage in SDM with patients.

Shared decision-making in urology and female pelvic floor medicine and reconstructive surgery

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a hallmark of patient-centred care that uses informed consent to help guide patients with making complex health-care decisions. In SDM, patients and providers work together to determine the best course of action based on both the current available evidence and the patient's values and preferences. SDM not only provides a framework for the legal and ethical obligations providers need to fulfil for informed consent, but also leads to improved knowledge of treatment options and satisfaction of decision-making for patients. Tools such as decision aids have been developed to support SDM for complex decisions. Several decision aids are available for use in the field of urology and female pelvic medicine and reconstructive surgery, but these decision aids are also associated with barriers to SDM implementation including patient, provider and systematic challenges. However, solutions to such barriers to SDM include continued development of SDM tools to improve patient engagement, expand training of providers in SDM communication models and a process to encourage implementation of SDM.

Clinician perspectives of pregnant women's participation in antiemetic decision-making: A qualitative study

This study explored clinician perceptions of women's participation in decision-making about antiemetic treatments during pregnancy, and the suitability of the five Choosing Wisely questions to increase women's involvement. The qualitative interpretive descriptive design used semi-structured interviews to capture data. Participants were six obstetricians and six midwives experienced in providing care for pregnant women seeking support for nausea and vomiting at a single private, obstetrician-led maternity health service in Australia. Thematic analysis revealed four themes that captured clinician perspectives about women's participation in decision-making about antiemetic treatments: (i) information gathering; (ii) developing an understanding; (iii) using knowledge; and (iv) making decisions. Clinician attitudes and perspectives, as well as their self-reported styles of communication and negotiation, influenced how they engaged with women during decision-making. While unfamiliar with the five Choosing Wisely questions, almost all participants considered them potentially useful, but for other clinicians. Strategies to actively involve women in decision-making about antiemetics were inconsistently used. The five Choosing Wisely questions may provide a useful tool for clinicians, but further research is needed to better understand women's perspectives and clinician-related barriers to shared decision-making.

The effectiveness of decision aids for pregnancy related decision-making in women with pre-pregnancy morbidity; systematic review and meta-analysis

INTRODUCTION

Women with pre-existing morbidity arising from medical conditions or previous caesarean section are at higher risk of adverse pregnancy outcomes compared to women without such morbidity. Women often face complex pregnancy-related decision-making that may be characterized by conflicting maternal and perinatal priorities. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to assess randomised controlled trials of decision aids to evaluate whether they are effective at reducing decisional conflict scores and to evaluate what type of decision aids are most effective for women with pre-existing morbidity in pregnancy.

METHODS

We searched Medline (via Ovid), Embase (via Ovid), CINAHL (via EBSCO) from the earliest entries until September 2021. We selected randomised controlled trials comparing patient decision aids for women with pre-existing morbidity with usual clinical practice or a control intervention. Study characteristics and Jadad risk of bias was recorded. Meta-analysis by pre-existing morbidity type was performed using Stata 17 and the data was presented with a Forest Plot. Random effects models were used to calculate summary estimates if there was substantial clinical or statistical heterogeneity and post mean DCS scores were described in a sensitivity analysis and presented as a line graph, to improve clinical interpretation of results.. A narrative synthesis of the selected studies evaluated what type of decision aid works and for in what circumstances.

RESULTS

Ten randomised controlled trials, which reported data from 4028 women, were included. Patient decision aids were evaluated in women with pre-existing morbidity who were undertaking pregnancy-related decision-making. Patient decision aids reduced decisional conflict scale scores by an additional - 3.7, 95% Confidence Interval - 5.9% to - 1.6%) compared to the control group. Women with pre-existing medical conditions were more conflicted at baseline and had greater reductions in decisional conflict scale score (mean difference vs. control group: - 6.6%; 95% CI - 9.8% to - 3.3%), in contrast to those with previous caesarean section (mean difference - 2.4%; 95% CI - 4.8% to - 0.1%). There was limited evidence on the effect of decision aids on health outcomes. Decision aids reduced unwanted variation in decision-making support across maternity settings.

CONCLUSION

Patient decision aids are effective tools to support personalised care planning and informed decision-making in women with pre-existing morbidity. Women with pre-existing medical morbidity were more conflicted at baseline and were more likely to benefit from decision aids. Adoption of aids in this population may lead to improve adherence and health outcomes, warranting further research.

Learning Health Systems Can Promote and Sustain High-Value Occupational Therapy

In the current policy context, the occupational therapy profession must act to promote and sustain high-value care. Stakeholders have delineated efforts, such as defining and measuring high-quality care processes or promoting the adoption of evidence into practice, that can enhance the value of occupational therapy services. There is a growing recognition, however, that low-value care is the product of deficiencies within health care systems and is therefore most amenable to system-level solutions. To date, the specific nature of system-level changes capable of identifying and rectifying low-value occupational therapy has yet to be elucidated. In this "The Issue Is. . ." column, we introduce occupational therapy to the Learning Health System concept and its essential functions. Moreover, we discuss action steps for occupational therapy stakeholders to lay the foundation for Learning Health Systems in their own professional contexts. What This Article Adds: This article is the first to outline concrete action steps needed to transform occupational therapy practice contexts into Learning Health Systems. Such a transformation would represent a system-level change capable of fostering the delivery of high-value occupational therapy services to clients in a variety of practice settings.

Exploring Canadian Veterans’ priorities regarding chronic pain research: A qualitative study

LAY SUMMARY

In 2020, the Canadian Federal Government launched the Chronic Pain Centre of Excellence for Canadian Veterans (CPCoE). A higher proportion of Veterans experience chronic pain than the general population and the Centre wanted to understand what research topics Veterans thought the new Centre should prioritize. One-on-one interviews were conducted with 11 Canadian Veterans living with chronic pain from five provinces. Eight priority areas for future research were determined: 1) pain care in the military, 2) postoperative care in the military, 3) coordination of services through Veterans Affairs Canada, 4) military-to-civilian transition, 5) primary care provider access outside the military, 6) knowledge of pain management among civilian health care providers, 7) engaging Veterans as partners in their care, and 8) identifying effective strategies for chronic pain management. These findings will help guide research efforts of the new CPCoE.

Considering the type and timing of breast reconstruction after mastectomy: Qualitative insights into women's decision-making

PURPOSE

The information women receive about the type and timing of breast reconstruction (BR) from healthcare providers is crucial to help them make an informed decision, and this is particularly important in complex cases and/or high-risk cases. This study sought to provide qualitative insights into Australian women's BR decision-making experiences.

METHOD

Twenty-nine women who had received a mastectomy and made decisions about BR, including the type (expander, implant and/or autologous) and timing (immediate, delayed or immediate-delayed), participated in semi-structured telephone interviews. Interviews were analysed thematically using the Framework method.

RESULTS

Seven themes were identified: 1) information provision and needs; 2) values and preferences; 3) pressure to decide; 4) feasibility (e.g. clinical and/or financial factors); 5) social influence and support; 6) multidisciplinary team and organisational structures; and 7) decision implementation and outcomes. Breast care nurse support, as well as collaboration and communication within multidisciplinary teams were perceived by women as facilitating the BR decision-making process.

CONCLUSIONS

The identified themes offer an in-depth explanation of how a sample of Australian women make BR decisions. The current findings highlight the often limited clinician-patient information-sharing and demonstrate the overarching influence of the multidisciplinary medical team and organisational structures on BR decision-making. Development of in-consult decision-aids and strategies to improve multidisciplinary care are discussed.

Medical cannabis or cannabinoids for chronic pain: a clinical practice guideline

CLINICAL QUESTION

What is the role of medical cannabis or cannabinoids for people living with chronic pain due to cancer or non-cancer causes?

CURRENT PRACTICE

Chronic pain is common and distressing and associated with considerable socioeconomic burden globally. Medical cannabis is increasingly used to manage chronic pain, particularly in jurisdictions that have enacted policies to reduce use of opioids; however, existing guideline recommendations are inconsistent, and cannabis remains illegal for therapeutic use in many countries.

RECOMMENDATION

The guideline expert panel issued a weak recommendation to offer a trial of non-inhaled medical cannabis or cannabinoids, in addition to standard care and management (if not sufficient), for people living with chronic cancer or non-cancer pain.

HOW THIS GUIDELINE WAS CREATED

An international guideline development panel including patients, clinicians with content expertise, and methodologists produced this recommendation in adherence with standards for trustworthy guidelines using the GRADE approach. The MAGIC Evidence Ecosystem Foundation (MAGIC) provided methodological support. The panel applied an individual patient perspective.

THE EVIDENCE

This recommendation is informed by a linked series of four systematic reviews summarising the current body of evidence for benefits and harms, as well as patient values and preferences, regarding medical cannabis or cannabinoids for chronic pain.

UNDERSTANDING THE RECOMMENDATION

The recommendation is weak because of the close balance between benefits and harms of medical cannabis for chronic pain. It reflects a high value placed on small to very small improvements in self reported pain intensity, physical functioning, and sleep quality, and willingness to accept a small to modest risk of mostly self limited and transient harms. Shared decision making is required to ensure patients make choices that reflect their values and personal context. Further research is warranted and may alter this recommendation.

Interactive Data Visualization Tool for Patient-Centered Decision Making in Kidney Cancer

PURPOSE

Patients and providers often lack clinical decision tools to enable effective shared decision making. This is especially true in the rapidly changing therapeutic landscape of metastatic kidney cancer. Using the International Metastatic Renal Cell Carcinoma Database Consortium (IMDC) criteria, a validated risk prediction tool for patients with metastatic renal cell carcinoma, we created and user-tested a novel interactive visualization for clinical use.

METHODS

An interactive visualization depicting IMDC criteria was created, with the final version including data for more than 4,500 patients. Usability testing was performed with nonmedical lay-users and medical oncology fellow physicians. Subjects used the tool to calculate median survival times based on IMDC criteria. User confidence was surveyed. An iterative user feedback implementation cycle was completed and informed revision of the tool.

RESULTS

The tool is available at CloViz-IMDC. Initially, 400 lay-users and 15 physicians completed clinical scenarios and surveys. Cumulative accuracy across scenarios was higher for physicians than lay-users (84% v 74%; P = .03). Eighty-three percent of lay-users and 87% of physicians thought the tool became intuitive with use. Sixty-eight percent of lay-users wanted to use the tool clinically compared with 87% of physicians. After revisions, the updated tool was user-tested with 100 lay-users and 15 physicians. Physicians, but not lay-users, showed significant improvement in accuracy in the updated version of the tool (90% v 67%; P = .008). Seventy-two percent of lay-users and 93% of physicians wanted to use the updated tool in a clinical setting.

CONCLUSION

A graphical method of interacting with a validated nomogram provides prognosis results that can be used by nonmedical lay-users and physicians, and has the potential for expanded use across many clinical conditions.

GPs' use and understanding of the benefits and harms of treatments for long-term conditions: a qualitative interview study

Background

To support shared decision making and improve the management of polypharmacy, it is recommended that GPs take into account quantitative information on the benefits and harms of treatments (QIRx). Quantitative evidence shows GPs’ knowledge of this is low.

Aim

To explore GPs’ attitudes to and understanding of QIRx for long-term conditions.

Design and setting

Qualitative interview study in UK general practice.

Method

Semi-structured interviews were carried out with 15 GPs. Audiorecordings were transcribed verbatim and a framework approach was used for analysis.

Results

Participants described knowing or using QIRx for only a few treatments. There was awareness of this knowledge deficit coupled with low confidence in statistical terminology. Some GPs perceived an absence of this information as an important barrier to optimal care, while others were content to follow guidelines. In the absence of this knowledge, other strategies were described to individualise treatment decisions. The idea of increasing the use of QIRx appealed to most participants, with imagined benefits for patients and themselves. However, potential barriers were described: a need for accessible information that can be understood and integrated into real-world practice, system factors, and communication challenges.

Conclusion

GPs were aware of their knowledge deficit with regard to an understanding of QIRx. Most participants were positive about the idea of increasing their use of QIRx in practice but described important challenges, which need to be considered when designing solutions.

Making Childhood Obesity a Priority: A Qualitative Study of Healthcare Professionals' Perspectives on Facilitating Communication and Improving Treatment

In Romania, one in four children has excess weight. Because childhood obesity is a sensitive topic, many healthcare professionals find it difficult to discuss children's excess weight with parents. This study aims to identify barriers and facilitators in childhood obesity-related communication, as perceived by healthcare professionals in Romania. As part of the STOP project, healthcare professionals (family physicians, pediatricians, and dieticians) who treat children with excess weight were invited to a telephone interview. The semi-structured questions were translated from a questionnaire previously used at the Swedish study site of the STOP project. Interviews were transcribed and then used for thematic analysis. Fifteen doctors and three dieticians (16 females and 2 males), with average 18.2 ± 10.1 years of experience, were interviewed. Four main themes were identified. Professionals reported that when children began experiencing obesity-related stigma or comorbidities, this became the tipping point of weight excess, where parents felt motivated to begin treatment. Barriers in communication were part of several layers of distrust, recognized as tension between professionals and caregivers due to conflicting beliefs about excess weight, as well as lack of trust in medical studies. Most respondents felt confident using models of good practice, consisting of a gentle approach and patient-centered care. Nonetheless, professionals noted systemic barriers due to a referral system and allocation of clinical time that hinder obesity treatment. They suggested that lack of specialized centers and inadequate education of healthcare professional conveys the system does not prioritize obesity treatment and prevention. The interviewed Romanian doctors and dieticians identified patient-centered care as key to treating children with obesity and building trust with their caregivers. However

their efforts are hindered by healthcare system barriers, including the lack of specialized centers, training, and a referral system. The findings therefore suggest that, to improve childhood obesity prevention and treatment, systemic barriers should be addressed.

Trial Registration:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03800823; 11 Jan 2019.

Decision aids linked to evidence summaries and clinical practice guidelines: results from user-testing in clinical encounters

Background

Tools for shared decision-making (e.g. decision aids) are intended to support health care professionals and patients engaged in clinical encounters involving shared decision-making. However, decision aids are hard to produce, and onerous to update. Consequently, they often do not reflect best current evidence, and show limited uptake in practice. In response, we initiated the Sharing Evidence to Inform Treatment decisions (SHARE-IT) project. Our goal was to develop and refine a new generation of decision aids that are generically produced along digitally structured guidelines and evidence summaries.

Methods

Applying principles of human-centred design and following the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) and GRADE methods for trustworthy evidence summaries we developed a decision aid prototype in collaboration with the Developing and Evaluating Communication strategies to support Informed Decisions and practice based on Evidence project (DECIDE). We iteratively user-tested the prototype in clinical consultations between clinicians and patients. Semi-structured interviews of participating clinicians and patients were conducted. Qualitative content analysis of both user-testing sessions and interviews was performed and results categorized according to a revised Morville’s framework of user-experience. We made it possible to produce, publish and use these decision aids in an electronic guideline authoring and publication platform (MAGICapp).

Results

Direct observations and analysis of user-testing of 28 clinical consultations between physicians and patients informed four major iterations that addressed readability, understandability, usability and ways to cope with information overload. Participants reported that the tool supported natural flow of the conversation and induced a positive shift in consultation habits towards shared decision-making. We integrated the functionality of SHARE-IT decision aids in MAGICapp, which has since generated numerous decision aids.

Conclusion

Our study provides a proof of concept that encounter decision aids can be generically produced from GRADE evidence summaries and clinical guidelines. Online authoring and publication platforms can help scale up production including continuous updating of electronic encounter decision aids, fully integrated with evidence summaries and clinical practice guidelines.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-021-01541-7.

Cost talk: protocol for a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial of an intervention helping patients and urologic surgeons discuss costs of care for slow-growing prostate cancer during shared decision-making

BACKGROUND

Costs of care are important to patients making cancer treatment decisions, but clinicians often do not feel prepared to discuss treatment costs. We aim to (1) assess the impact of a conversation-based decision aid (Option Grid) containing cost information about slow-growing prostate cancer management options, combined with urologic surgeon training, on the frequency and quality of patient-urologic surgeon cost conversations, and (2) examine the impact of the decision aid and surgeon training on decision quality.

METHODS

We will conduct a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial in outpatient urology practices affiliated with a large academic medical center in the USA. We will randomize five urologic surgeons to four intervention sequences and enroll their patients with a first-time diagnosis of slow-growing prostate cancer independently at each period. Primary outcomes include frequency of cost conversations, initiator of cost conversations, and whether or not a referral is made to address costs. These outcomes will be collected by patient report (post-visit survey) and by observation (audio-recorded clinic visits) with consent. Other outcomes include the following: patient-reported decisional conflict post-visit and at 3-month follow-up, decision regret at 3-month follow-up, shared decision-making post-visit, communication post-visit, and financial toxicity post-visit and at 3-month follow-up; clinician-reported attitudes about shared decision-making before and after the study, and feasibility of sustained intervention use. We will use hierarchical regression analysis to assess patient-level outcomes, including urologic surgeon as a random effect to account for clustering of patient participants.

DISCUSSION

This study evaluates a two-part intervention to improve cost discussions between urologic surgeons and patients when deciding how to manage slow-growing prostate cancer. Establishing the effectiveness of the strategy under study will allow for its replication in other clinical decision contexts.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04397016 . Registered on 21 May 2020.

Redevelopment of the Predict: Breast Cancer website and recommendations for developing interfaces to support decision-making

Objectives

To develop a new interface for the widely used prognostic breast cancer tool: Predict: Breast Cancer. To facilitate decision‐making around post‐surgery breast cancer treatments. To derive recommendations for communicating the outputs of prognostic models to patients and their clinicians.

Method

We employed a user‐centred design process comprised of background research and iterative testing of prototypes with clinicians and patients. Methods included surveys, focus groups and usability testing.

Results

The updated interface now caters to the needs of a wider audience through the addition of new visualisations, instantaneous updating of results, enhanced explanatory information and the addition of new predictors and outputs. A programme of future research was identified and is now underway, including the provision of quantitative data on the adverse effects of adjuvant breast cancer treatments.

Based on our user‐centred design process, we identify six recommendations for communicating the outputs of prognostic models including the need to contextualise statistics, identify and address gaps in knowledge, and the critical importance of engaging with prospective users when designing communications.

Conclusions

For prognostic algorithms to fulfil their potential to assist with decision‐making they need carefully designed interfaces. User‐centred design puts patients and clinicians needs at the forefront, allowing them to derive the maximum benefit from prognostic models.

Intention to Use Wiki-Based Knowledge Tools: Survey of Quebec Emergency Health Professionals

BACKGROUND

Clinical decision support systems are information technologies that assist clinicians in making better decisions. Their adoption has been limited because their content is difficult to adapt to local contexts and slow to adapt to emerging evidence. Collaborative writing applications such as wikis have the potential to increase access to existing and emerging evidence-based knowledge at the point of care, standardize emergency clinical decision making, and quickly adapt this knowledge to local contexts. However, little is known about the factors influencing health professionals' use of wiki-based knowledge tools.

OBJECTIVE

This study aims to measure emergency physicians' (EPs) and other acute care health professionals' (ACHPs) intentions to use wiki-based knowledge tools in trauma care and identify determinants of this intention that can be used in future theory-based interventions for promoting the use of wiki-based knowledge tools in trauma care.

METHODS

In total, 266 EPs and 907 ACHPs (nurses, respiratory therapists, and pharmacists) from 12 Quebec trauma centers were asked to answer a survey based on the theory of planned behavior (TPB). The TPB constructs were measured using a 7-point Likert scale. Descriptive statistics and Pearson correlations between the TPB constructs and intention were calculated. Multiple linear regression analysis was conducted to identify the salient beliefs.

RESULTS

Among the eligible participants, 57.1% (152/266) of EPs and 31.9% (290/907) of ACHPs completed the questionnaire. For EPs, we found that attitude, perceived behavioral control (PBC), and subjective norm (SN) were significant determinants of the intention to use wiki-based knowledge tools and explained 62% of its variance. None of the sociodemographic variables were related to EPs' intentions to use wiki-based knowledge tools. The regression model identified two normative beliefs ("approval by physicians" and "approval by patients") and two behavioral beliefs ("refreshes my memory" and "reduces errors"). For ACHPs, attitude, PBC, SN, and two sociodemographic variables (profession and the previous personal use of a wiki) were significantly related to the intention to use wiki-based knowledge tools and explained 60% of the variance in behavioral intention. The final regression model for ACHPs included two normative beliefs ("approval by the hospital trauma team" and "people less comfortable with information technology"), one control belief ("time constraints"), and one behavioral belief ("access to evidence").

CONCLUSIONS

The intentions of EPs and ACHPs to use wiki-based knowledge tools to promote best practices in trauma care can be predicted in part by attitude, SN, and PBC. We also identified salient beliefs that future theory-based interventions should promote for the use of wiki-based knowledge tools in trauma care. These interventions will address the barriers to using wiki-based knowledge tools, find ways to ensure the quality of their content, foster contributions, and support the exploration of wiki-based knowledge tools as potential effective knowledge translation tools in trauma care.

Citizen advisory groups for the creation and improvement of decision aids: experience from two Swiss centers for primary care

BACKGROUND

Guidelines for patient decision aids (DA) recommend target population involvement throughout the development process, but developers may struggle because of limited resources. We sought to develop a feasible means of getting repeated feedback from users.

METHODS

Between 2017 and 2020, two Swiss centers for primary care (Lausanne and Bern) created citizen advisory groups to contribute to multiple improvement cycles for colorectal, prostate and lung cancer screening DAs. Following Community Based Participatory Research principles, we collaborated with local organizations to recruit citizens aged 50 to 75 without previous cancer diagnoses. We remunerated incidental costs and participant time. One center supplemented in-person meetings by mailed paper questionnaires, while the other supplemented meetings using small-group workshops and analyses of meeting transcripts.

RESULTS

In Lausanne, we received input from 49 participants for three DAs between 2017 and 2020. For each topic, participants gave feedback on the initial draft and 2 subsequent versions during in-person meetings with ~ 8 participants and one round of mailed questionnaires. In Bern, 10 participants were recruited among standardized patients from the university, all of whom attended in-person meetings every three months between 2017 and 2020. At both sites, numerous changes were made to the content, appearance, language, and tone of DAs and outreach materials. Participants reported high levels of satisfaction with the participative process.

CONCLUSIONS

Citizen advisory groups are a feasible means of repeatedly incorporating end-user feedback during the creation of multiple DAs. Methodological differences between the two centers underline the need for a flexible model adapted to local needs.

Strategies for the Management of Solitary Pulmonary Nodules. A Survey of Patient Preferences

BACKGROUND

Guideline-based strategies for evaluation of solitary pulmonary nodules are tailored to the likelihood of malignancy. Surveillance, biopsy or resection are all reasonable approaches in fit individuals when the likelihood of malignancy is intermediate. Given the paucity of data demonstrating superior outcomes and important trade-offs between strategies, guidelines emphasize the importance of eliciting patient preferences and engaging in shared decision-making, however there is little literature on what patient preferences actually are.

METHODS

We conducted a cross-sectional, interview-administered questionnaire in 100 adults recruited from a metropolitan teaching hospital, using a hypothetical scenario designed to elicit patient preferences for different management strategies of solitary pulmonary nodules with probability of malignancy between 10% and 70%.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants was 62 years (range 45 to 80), 56% were male, 94% were current or ex-smokers. Ninety-four percent completed all questions. At 10% probability of malignancy, 36.3% preferred surveillance, 42.4% preferred needle biopsy and 21.2% preferred surgical resection. Preference for surgical resection increased to 53.5% and 86.2% when the probability of malignancy was 30% and 70% respectively. Changes in the diagnostic yield of CT biopsy significantly altered preferences when probability of malignancy was 10% or 30%.

CONCLUSIONS

The majority of participants surveyed expressed a preference for some type of biopsy over observation at all levels of solitary pulmonary nodule probability of malignancy evaluated. In an era of increasing solitary pulmonary nodule detection and patient-centered care, if confirmed in broader studies, these findings have considerable implications for processes of care and resource allocation.