Shared decision-making following disclosure of coronary heart disease genetic risk: results from a randomized clinical trial

Shared Decision-Making in Cardiovascular Risk Factor Management: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Importance

The effect of shared decision-making (SDM) and the extent of its use in interventions to improve cardiovascular risk remain unclear.

Objective

To assess the extent to which SDM is used in interventions aimed to enhance the management of cardiovascular risk factors and to explore the association of SDM with decisional outcomes, cardiovascular risk factors, and health behaviors.

Data Sources

For this systematic review and meta-analysis, a literature search was conducted in the Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for articles published from inception to June 24, 2022, without language restrictions.

Study Selection

Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing SDM-based interventions with standard of care for cardiovascular risk factor management were included.

Data Extraction and Synthesis

The systematic search resulted in 9365 references. Duplicates were removed, and 2 independent reviewers screened the trials (title, abstract, and full text) and extracted data. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Decisional outcomes, cardiovascular risk factor outcomes, and health behavioral outcomes.

Results

This review included 57 RCTs with 88 578 patients and 1341 clinicians. A total of 59 articles were included, as 2 RCTs were reported twice. Nearly half of the studies (29 [49.2%]) tested interventions that targeted both patients and clinicians, and an equal number (29 [49.2%]) exclusively focused on patients. More than half (32 [54.2%]) focused on diabetes management, and one-quarter focused on multiple cardiovascular risk factors (14 [23.7%]). Most studies (35 [59.3%]) assessed cardiovascular risk factors and health behaviors as well as decisional outcomes. The quality of studies reviewed was low to fair. The SDM intervention was associated with a decrease of 4.21 points (95% CI, -8.21 to -0.21) in Decisional Conflict Scale scores (9 trials; I2 = 85.6%) and a decrease of 0.20% (95% CI, -0.39% to -0.01%) in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels (18 trials; I2 = 84.2%).

Conclusions and Relevance

In this systematic review and meta-analysis of the current state of research on SDM interventions for cardiovascular risk management, there was a slight reduction in decisional conflict and an improvement in HbA1c levels with substantial heterogeneity. High-quality studies are needed to inform the use of SDM to improve cardiovascular risk management.

A scoping review into the explanations for differences in the degrees of shared decision making experienced by patients

OBJECTIVES

In order to improve the degree of shared decision making (SDM) experienced by patients, it is necessary to gain insight into the explanations for the differences in these degrees.

METHODS

A scoping review of the literature on the explanations for differences in the degree of SDM experienced by patients was conducted. We assessed 21,329 references. Ultimately, 308 studies were included. The explanations were divided into micro, meso, and macro levels.

RESULTS

The explanations are mainly related to the micro level. They include explanations related to the patient and healthcare professionals, the relationship between the patient and the physician, and the involvement of the patient's relatives. On the macro level, explanations are related to restrictions within the healthcare system such as time constraints, and adequate information about treatment options. On the meso level, explanations are related to the continuity of care and the involvement of other healthcare professionals.

CONCLUSIONS

SDM is not an isolated process between the physician and patient. Explanations are connected to the macro, meso, and micro levels.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

This scoping review suggests that there could be more focus on explanations related to the macro and meso levels, and on how explanations at different levels are interrelated.

Simplified rules-based tool to facilitate the application of up-to-date management recommendations in cardio-oncology

BACKGROUND

Millions of cancer survivors are at risk of cardiovascular diseases, a leading cause of morbidity and mortality. Tools to potentially facilitate implementation of cardiology guidelines, consensus recommendations, and scientific statements to prevent atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) and other cardiovascular diseases are limited. Thus, inadequate utilization of cardiovascular medications and imaging is widespread, including significantly lower rates of statin use among cancer survivors for whom statin therapy is indicated.

METHODS

In this methodological study, we leveraged published guidelines documents to create a rules-based tool to include guidelines, expert consensus, and medical society scientific statements relevant to point of care cardiovascular disease prevention in the cardiovascular care of cancer survivors. Any overlap, redundancy, or ambiguous recommendations were identified and eliminated across all converted sources of knowledge. The integrity of the tool was assessed with use case examples and review of subsequent care suggestions.

RESULTS

An initial selection of 10 guidelines, expert consensus, and medical society scientific statements was made for this study. Then 7 were kept owing to overlap and revisions in society recommendations over recent years. Extensive formulae were employed to translate the recommendations of 7 selected guidelines into rules and proposed action measures. Patient suitability and care suggestions were assessed for several use case examples.

CONCLUSION

A simple rules-based application was designed to provide a potential format to deliver critical cardiovascular disease best-practice prevention recommendations at the point of care for cancer survivors. A version of this tool may potentially facilitate implementing these guidelines across clinics, payers, and health systems for preventing cardiovascular diseases in cancer survivors.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.Gov Identifier: NCT05377320.

Examining the Impact of Polygenic Risk Information in Primary Care

BACKGROUND

Polygenic risk testing examines variation across multiple genes to estimate a risk score for a particular disease, including risk scores for many common, chronic health conditions. Although polygenic risk information (PRI) may be a promising tool for enhancing preventive counseling and facilitating early identification of disease, its potential impact on primary-care encounters and disease prevention efforts has not been well characterized.

METHODS

We conducted in-depth, semi-structured interviews of patients to assess their understandings of PRI and their beliefs about its relevance to disease prevention.

RESULTS

We completed interviews with 19 participants. Participants described enthusiasm for the generation of PRI and recognized its utility for disease prevention. Participants also described the value of PRI as limited if not corroborated by non-genetic risk factors. Finally, participants noted that PRI, by itself, would be insufficient as a trigger for initiating many preventive interventions.

CONCLUSION

PRI has the potential to become an important tool in primary care. However, patient views about PRI as well as the complexities of disease prevention in the primary care context may limit the impact of PRI on disease prevention.

Patient similarity and other artificial intelligence machine learning algorithms in clinical decision aid for shared decision-making in the Prevention of Cardiovascular Toxicity (PACT): a feasibility trial design

BACKGROUND

The many improvements in cancer therapies have led to an increased number of survivors, which comes with a greater risk of consequent/subsequent cardiovascular disease. Identifying effective management strategies that can mitigate this risk of cardiovascular complications is vital. Therefore, developing computer-driven and personalized clinical decision aid interventions that can provide early detection of patients at risk, stratify that risk, and recommend specific cardio-oncology management guidelines and expert consensus recommendations is critically important.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the feasibility, acceptability, and utility of the use of an artificial intelligence (AI)-powered clinical decision aid tool in shared decision making between the cancer survivor patient and the cardiologist regarding prevention of cardiovascular disease.

DESIGN

This is a single-center, double-arm, open-label, randomized interventional feasibility study. Our cardio-oncology cohort of > 4000 individuals from our Clinical Research Data Warehouse will be queried to identify at least 200 adult cancer survivors who meet the eligibility criteria. Study participants will be randomized into either the Clinical Decision Aid Group (where patients will use the clinical decision aid in addition to current practice) or the Control Group (current practice). The primary endpoint of this study is to assess for each patient encounter whether cardiovascular medications and imaging pursued were consistent with current medical society recommendations. Additionally, the perceptions of using the clinical decision tool will be evaluated based on patient and physician feedback through surveys and focus groups. This trial will determine whether a clinical decision aid tool improves cancer survivors' medication use and imaging surveillance recommendations aligned with current medical guidelines.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ClinicalTrials.Gov Identifier: NCT05377320.

Models of communication for polygenic scores and associated psychosocial and behavioral effects on recipients: A systematic review

PURPOSE

This study aimed to systematically review current models for communicating polygenic scores (PGS) and psycho-behavioral outcomes of receiving PGSs.

METHODS

Original research on communicating PGSs and reporting on psycho-behavioral outcomes was included. Search terms were applied to 5 databases and were limited by date (2009-2021).

RESULTS

In total, 28 articles, representing 17 studies in several disease settings were identified. There was limited consistency in PGS communication and evaluation/reporting of outcomes. Most studies (n = 14) presented risk in multiple ways (ie, numerically, verbally, and/or visually). Three studies provided personalized lifestyle advice and additional resources. Only 1 of 17 studies reported using behavior change theory to inform their PGS intervention. A total of 8 studies found no evidence of long-term negative psychosocial effects up to 12 months post result. Of 14 studies reporting on behavior, 9 found at least 1 favorable change after PGS receipt. When stratified by risk, 7 out of 9 studies found high PGS was associated with favorable changes including lifestyle, medication, and screening. Low-risk PGS was not associated with maladaptive behaviors (n = 4).

CONCLUSION

PGS has the potential to benefit health behavior. High variability among studies emphasizes the need for developing standardized guidelines for communicating PGSs and evaluating psycho-behavioral outcomes. Our findings call for development of best communication practices and evidence-based interventions informed by behavior change theories.

The genetic interactions between non-alcoholic fatty liver disease and cardiovascular diseases

The ongoing debate on whether non-alcoholic fatty liver disease (NAFLD) is an active contributor or an innocent bystander in the development of cardiovascular disease (CVD) has sparked interests in understanding the common mediators between the two biologically distinct entities. This comprehensive review identifies and curates genetic studies of NAFLD overlapping with CVD, and describes the colinear as well as opposing correlations between genetic associations for the two diseases. Here, CVD described in relation to NAFLD are coronary artery disease, cardiomyopathy and atrial fibrillation. Unique findings of this review included certain NAFLD susceptibility genes that possessed cardioprotective properties. Moreover, the complex interactions of genetic and environmental risk factors shed light on the disparity in genetic influence on NAFLD and its incident CVD. This serves to unravel NAFLD-mediated pathways in order to reduce CVD events, and helps identify targeted treatment strategies, develop polygenic risk scores to improve risk prediction and personalise disease prevention.

Use of coronary computed tomography or polygenic risk scores to prompt action to reduce coronary artery disease risk: the CAPAR-CAD trial

BACKGROUND

The traditional primary prevention paradigm for coronary artery disease (CAD) centers on population-based algorithms to classify individual risk. However, this approach often misclassifies individuals and leaves many in the 'intermediate' category, for whom there is no clear preferred prevention strategy. Coronary artery calcium (CAC) and polygenic risk scoring (PRS) are 2 contemporary tools for risk prediction to enhance the impact of effective management.

AIMS

To determine how these CAC and PRS impact adherence to pharmacotherapy and lifestyle measures in asymptomatic individuals with subclinical atherosclerosis.

METHODS

The CAPAR-CAD study is a multicenter, open, randomized controlled trial in Victoria, Australia. Participants are self-selected individuals aged 40 to 70 years with no prior history of cardiovascular disease (CVD), intermediate 10-year risk for CAD as determined by the pooled cohort equation (PCE), and CAC scores >0. All participants will have a health assessment, a full CT coronary angiogram (CTCA), and PRS calculation. They will then be randomized to receive their risk presented either as PCE and CAC, or PCE and PRS. The intervention includes e-Health coaching focused on risk factor management, health education and pharmacotherapy, and follow-up to augment adherence to a statin medication. The primary endpoint is a change in low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) from baseline to 12 months. The secondary endpoint is between-group differences in behavior modification and adherence to statin pharmacotherapy.

RESULTS

As of July 31, 2021, we have screened 1,903 individuals. We present the results of the 574 participants deemed eligible after baseline assessment.

Are shared decision making studies well enough described to be replicated? Secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review

Background

Interventions to change health professionals’ behaviour are often difficult to replicate. Incomplete reporting is a key reason and a source of waste in health research. We aimed to assess the reporting of shared decision making (SDM) interventions.

Methods

We extracted data from a 2017 Cochrane systematic review whose aim was to determine the effectiveness of interventions to increase the use of SDM by healthcare professionals. In a secondary analysis, we used the 12 items of the Template for Intervention Description and Replication (TIDieR) checklist to analyze quantitative data. We used a conceptual framework for implementation fidelity to analyze qualitative data, which added details to various TIDieR items (e.g. under “what materials?” we also reported on ease of access to materials). We used SAS 9.4 for all analyses.

Results

Of the 87 studies included in the 2017 Cochrane review, 83 were randomized trials, three were non-randomized trials, and one was a controlled before-and-after study. Items most completely reported were: “brief name” (87/87, 100%), “why” (rationale) (86/87, 99%), and “what” (procedures) (81/87, 93%). The least completely reported items (under 50%) were “materials” (29/87, 33%), “who” (23/87, 26%), and “when and how much” (18/87, 21%), as well as the conditional items: “tailoring” (8/87, 9%), “modifications” (3/87, 4%), and “how well (actual)” (i.e. delivered as planned?) (3/87, 3%). Interventions targeting patients were better reported than those targeting health professionals or both patients and health professionals, e.g. 84% of patient-targeted intervention studies reported “How”, (delivery modes), vs. 67% for those targeting health professionals and 32% for those targeting both. We also reported qualitative analyses for most items. Overall reporting of items for all interventions was 41.5%.

Conclusions

Reporting on all groups or components of SDM interventions was incomplete in most SDM studies published up to 2017. Our results provide guidance for authors on what elements need better reporting to improve the replicability of their SDM interventions.

Coronary Artery Disease Genetics Enlightened by Genome-Wide Association Studies

Many cardiovascular diseases are facilitated by strong inheritance. For example, large-scale genetic studies identified hundreds of genomic loci that affect the risk of coronary artery disease. At each of these loci, common variants are associated with disease risk with robust statistical evidence but individually small effect sizes. Only a minority of candidate genes found at these loci are involved in the pathophysiology of traditional risk factors, but experimental research is making progress in identifying novel, and, in part, unexpected mechanisms. Targets identified by genome-wide association studies have already led to the development of novel treatments, specifically in lipid metabolism. This review summarizes recent genetic and experimental findings in this field. In addition, the development and possible clinical usefulness of polygenic risk scores in risk prediction and individualization of treatment, particularly in lipid metabolism, are discussed.

Integrating Option Grid Patient Decision Aids in the Epic Electronic Health Record: Case Study at 5 Health Systems

Background

Some researchers argue that the successful implementation of patient decision aids (PDAs) into clinical workflows depends on their integration into electronic health records (EHRs). Anecdotally, we know that EHR integration is a complex and time-consuming task; yet, the process has not been examined in detail. As part of an implementation project, we examined the work involved in integrating an encounter PDA for symptomatic uterine fibroids into Epic EHR systems.

Objective

This study aims to identify the steps and time required to integrate a PDA into the Epic EHR system and examine facilitators and barriers to the integration effort.

Methods

We conducted a case study at 5 academic medical centers in the United States. A clinical champion at each institution liaised with their Epic EHR team to initiate the integration of the uterine fibroid Option Grid PDAs into clinician-facing menus. We scheduled regular meetings with the Epic software analysts and an expert Epic technologist to discuss how best to integrate the tools into Epic for use by clinicians with patients. The meetings were then recorded and transcribed. Two researchers independently coded the transcripts and field notes before categorizing the codes and conducting a thematic analysis to identify the facilitators and barriers to EHR integration. The steps were reviewed and edited by an Epic technologist to ensure their accuracy.

Results

Integrating the uterine fibroid Option Grid PDA into clinician-facing menus required an 18-month timeline and a 6-step process, as follows: task priority negotiation with Epic software teams, security risk assessment, technical review, Epic configuration; troubleshooting, and launch. The key facilitators of the process were the clinical champions who advocated for integration at the institutional level and the presence of an experienced technologist who guided Epic software analysts during the build. Another facilitator was the use of an emerging industry standard app platform (Health Level 7 Substitutable Medical Applications and Reusable Technologies on Fast Healthcare Interoperability Resources) as a means of integrating the Option Grid into existing systems. This standard platform enabled clinicians to access the tools by using single sign-on credentials and prevented protected health information from leaving the EHR. Key barriers were the lack of control over the Option Grid product developed by EBSCO (Elton B Stephens Company) Health; the periodic Epic upgrades that can result in a pause on new software configurations; and the unforeseen software problems with Option Grid (ie, inability to print the PDA), which delayed the launch of the PDA.

Conclusions

The integration of PDAs into the Epic EHR system requires a 6-step process and an 18-month timeline. The process required support and prioritization from a clinical champion, guidance from an experienced technologist, and a willing EHR software developer team.

How Do We Incorporate Polygenic Risk Scores in Cardiovascular Disease Risk Assessment and Management?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The potential of polygenic risk scores (PRS) to improve atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD) risk assessment and management has stoked significant interest in their incorporation into clinical management. The goal of this review is to apprise the readers of the latest developments and evidence of PRS readiness for clinical integration. We also discuss current limitations that must be addressed before PRS can be implemented into routine clinical practice.

RECENT FINDINGS

PRS have been shown to improve risk stratification for ASCVD and to identify patients who may derive increased benefit from primary and secondary prevention. Risk captured by PRS appears largely independent of traditional risk factors and can be ascertained at birth, prior to the development of traditional clinical risk factors. Genetic risk is modifiable through lifestyle modifications and medications. PRS offers a valuable way to improve early identification of actionable CVD risk. However, further work is needed before PRS can be implemented clinically.

Genetic Risk Assessment for Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease: A Guide for the General Cardiologist

Genetic testing for cardiovascular (CV) disease has had a profound impact on the diagnosis and evaluation of monogenic causes of CV disease, such as hypertrophic and familial cardiomyopathies, long QT syndrome, and familial hypercholesterolemia (FH). The success in genetic testing for monogenic diseases has prompted special interest in utilizing genetic information in the risk assessment of more common diseases such as atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease (ASCVD). Polygenic risk scores (PRS) have been developed to assess the risk of coronary artery disease (CAD) that now include millions of single-nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) that have been identified through genome-wide association studies (GWAS). While these PRS have demonstrated a strong association with CAD in large cross-sectional population studies, there remains intense debate regarding the added value that PRS contribute to existing clinical risk prediction models such as the pooled cohort equations (PCEs). In this review, we provide a brief background of genetic testing for monogenic drivers of CV disease and then focus on the recent developments in genetic risk assessment of ASCVD, including the use of PRS. We outline the genetic testing that is currently available to all cardiologists in the clinic and discuss the evolving sphere of specialized cardiovascular genetics programs (CVGPs) that integrate the expertise of cardiologists, geneticists, and genetic counselors. Finally, we review the possible implications that PRS and pharmacogenomic data may soon have on clinical practice in the care for patients with or at risk of developing ASCVD.

Sex and gender considerations in implementation interventions to promote shared decision making: A secondary analysis of a Cochrane systematic review

Background

Shared decision making (SDM) in healthcare is an approach in which health professionals support patients in making decisions based on best evidence and their values and preferences. Considering sex and gender in SDM research is necessary to produce precisely-targeted interventions, improve evidence quality and redress health inequities. A first step is correct use of terms. We therefore assessed sex and gender terminology in SDM intervention studies.

Materials and methods

We performed a secondary analysis of a Cochrane review of SDM interventions. We extracted study characteristics and their use of sex, gender or related terms (mention; number of categories). We assessed correct use of sex and gender terms using three criteria: “non-binary use”, “use of appropriate categories” and “non-interchangeable use of sex and gender”. We computed the proportion of studies that met all, any or no criteria, and explored associations between criteria met and study characteristics.

Results

Of 87 included studies, 58 (66.7%) mentioned sex and/or gender. The most mentioned related terms were “female” (60.9%) and “male” (59.8%). Of the 58 studies, authors used sex and gender as binary variables respectively in 36 (62%) and in 34 (58.6%) studies. No study met the criterion “non-binary use”. Authors used appropriate categories to describe sex and gender respectively in 28 (48.3%) and in 8 (13.8%) studies. Of the 83 (95.4%) studies in which sex and/or gender, and/or related terms were mentioned, authors used sex and gender non-interchangeably in 16 (19.3%). No study met all three criteria. Criteria met did not vary according to study characteristics (p>.05).

Conclusions

In SDM implementation studies, sex and gender terms and concepts are in a state of confusion. Our results suggest the urgency of adopting a standardized use of sex and gender terms and concepts before these considerations can be properly integrated into implementation research.

Polygenic Scores to Assess Atherosclerotic Cardiovascular Disease Risk: Clinical Perspectives and Basic Implications

An individual's susceptibility to atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease is influenced by numerous clinical and lifestyle factors, motivating the multifaceted approaches currently endorsed for primary and secondary cardiovascular disease prevention. With growing knowledge of the genetic basis of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease-in particular, coronary artery disease-and its contribution to disease pathogenesis, there is increased interest in understanding the potential clinical utility of a genetic predictor that might further refine the assessment and management of atherosclerotic cardiovascular disease risk. Rapid scientific and technological advances have enabled widespread genotyping efforts and dynamic research in the field of coronary artery disease genetic risk prediction. In this review, we describe how genomic analyses of coronary artery disease have been leveraged to create polygenic risk scores. We then discuss evaluations of the clinical utility of these scores, pertinent mechanistic insights gleaned, and practical considerations relevant to the implementation of polygenic risk scores in the health care setting.

Polygenic risk scores in coronary artery disease

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Large genome-wide association studies (GWAS) have identified variants accounting for a substantial portion of the heritable risk for coronary artery disease (CAD). These studies have catalyzed drug discovery and generated the possibility of improved risk prediction and stratification. Here, we review the current state-of-the art in polygenic risk scores (PRSs) and look to the future, as these scores move towards clinical application.

RECENT FINDINGS

Over the last decade, multilocus PRSs for CAD have expanded to include millions of variants and demonstrated strong association with CAD outcomes, even when adjusted for traditional risk factors. Recently, PRSs have shown better prediction of CAD outcomes than any single traditional risk factor alone. Advances in statistical methods used to generate PRSs have improved their predictive ability and transferability between populations with varied ancestries. Initial clinical studies have also demonstrated the potential of genetic information to impact shared decision-making between patients and providers, leading to improved outcomes.

SUMMARY

PRSs can improve risk stratification for CAD especially in white/European populations and have the potential to alter routine clinical care. However, unlocking this potential will require additional research in PRSs in nonwhite populations and substantial investment in clinical implementation studies.

The impact and utility of encounter patient decision aids: Systematic review, meta-analysis and narrative synthesis

OBJECTIVE

To determine the effect of encounter patient decision aids (PDAs) as evaluated in randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and conduct a narrative synthesis of non-randomized studies assessing feasibility, utility and their integration into clinical workflows.

METHODS

Databases were systematically searched for RCTs of encounter PDAs to enable the conduct of a meta-analysis. We used a framework analysis approach to conduct a narrative synthesis of non-randomized studies.

RESULTS

We included 23 RCTs and 30 non-randomized studies. Encounter PDAs significantly increased knowledge (SMD = 0.42; 95% CI 0.30, 0.55), lowered decisional conflict (SMD= -0.33; 95% CI -0.56, -0.09), increased observational-based assessment of shared decision making (SMD = 0.94; 95% CI 0.40, 1.48) and satisfaction with the decision-making process (OR = 1.78; 95% CI 1.19, 2.66) without increasing visit durations (SMD= -0.06; 95% CI -0.29, 0.16). The narrative synthesis showed that encounter tools have high utility for patients and clinicians, yet important barriers to implementation exist (i.e. time constraints) at the clinical and organizational level.

CONCLUSION

Encounter PDAs have a positive impact on patient-clinician collaboration, despite facing implementation barriers.

PRACTICAL IMPLICATIONS

The potential utility of encounter PDAs requires addressing the systemic and structural barriers that prevent adoption in clinical practice.

Humanistic communication in the evaluation of shared decision making: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess the extent to which evaluations of shared decision making (SDM) assess the extent and quality of humanistic communication (i.e., respect, compassion, empathy).

METHODS

We systematically searched Web of Science and Scopus for prospective studies published between 2012 and February 2018 that evaluated SDM in actual clinical decisions using validated SDM measures. Two reviewers working independently and in duplicate extracted all statements from eligible studies and all items from SDM measurement instruments that referred to humanistic patient-clinician communication.

RESULTS

Of the 154 eligible studies, 14 (9%) included ≥1 statements regarding humanistic communication, either in framing the study (N = 2), measuring impact (e.g., empathy, respect, interpersonal skills; N = 9), as patients'/clinicians' accounts of SDM (N = 2), in interpreting study results (N = 3), and in discussing implications of study findings (N = 3). Of the 192 items within the 11 SDM measurement instruments deployed in the included studies, 7 (3.6%) items assessed humanistic communication.

CONCLUSION

Assessments of the quality of SDM focus narrowly on SDM technique and rarely assess humanistic aspects of patient-clinician communication.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Considering SDM as merely a technique may reduce SDM's patient-centeredness and undermine its' contribution to patient care.

Interventions for increasing the use of shared decision making by healthcare professionals

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) is a process by which a healthcare choice is made by the patient, significant others, or both with one or more healthcare professionals. However, it has not yet been widely adopted in practice. This is the second update of this Cochrane review.

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of interventions for increasing the use of SDM by healthcare professionals. We considered interventions targeting patients, interventions targeting healthcare professionals, and interventions targeting both.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase and five other databases on 15 June 2017. We also searched two clinical trials registries and proceedings of relevant conferences. We checked reference lists and contacted study authors to identify additional studies.

SELECTION CRITERIA

Randomized and non-randomized trials, controlled before-after studies and interrupted time series studies evaluating interventions for increasing the use of SDM in which the primary outcomes were evaluated using observer-based or patient-reported measures.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard methodological procedures expected by Cochrane.We used GRADE to assess the certainty of the evidence.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 87 studies (45,641 patients and 3113 healthcare professionals) conducted mainly in the USA, Germany, Canada and the Netherlands. Risk of bias was high or unclear for protection against contamination, low for differences in the baseline characteristics of patients, and unclear for other domains.Forty-four studies evaluated interventions targeting patients. They included decision aids, patient activation, question prompt lists and training for patients among others and were administered alone (single intervention) or in combination (multifaceted intervention). The certainty of the evidence was very low. It is uncertain if interventions targeting patients when compared with usual care increase SDM whether measured by observation (standardized mean difference (SMD) 0.54, 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.13 to 1.22; 4 studies; N = 424) or reported by patients (SMD 0.32, 95% CI 0.16 to 0.48; 9 studies; N = 1386; risk difference (RD) -0.09, 95% CI -0.19 to 0.01; 6 studies; N = 754), reduce decision regret (SMD -0.10, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.19; 1 study; N = 212), improve physical (SMD 0.00, 95% CI -0.36 to 0.36; 1 study; N = 116) or mental health-related quality of life (QOL) (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.26 to 0.46; 1 study; N = 116), affect consultation length (SMD 0.10, 95% CI -0.39 to 0.58; 2 studies; N = 224) or cost (SMD 0.82, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.22; 1 study; N = 105).It is uncertain if interventions targeting patients when compared with interventions of the same type increase SDM whether measured by observation (SMD 0.88, 95% CI 0.39 to 1.37; 3 studies; N = 271) or reported by patients (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.18 to 0.24; 11 studies; N = 1906); (RD 0.03, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.08; 10 studies; N = 2272); affect consultation length (SMD -0.65, 95% CI -1.29 to -0.00; 1 study; N = 39) or costs. No data were reported for decision regret, physical or mental health-related QOL.Fifteen studies evaluated interventions targeting healthcare professionals. They included educational meetings, educational material, educational outreach visits and reminders among others. The certainty of evidence is very low. It is uncertain if these interventions when compared with usual care increase SDM whether measured by observation (SMD 0.70, 95% CI 0.21 to 1.19; 6 studies; N = 479) or reported by patients (SMD 0.03, 95% CI -0.15 to 0.20; 5 studies; N = 5772); (RD 0.01, 95%C: -0.03 to 0.06; 2 studies; N = 6303); reduce decision regret (SMD 0.29, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.51; 1 study; N = 326), affect consultation length (SMD 0.51, 95% CI 0.21 to 0.81; 1 study, N = 175), cost (no data available) or physical health-related QOL (SMD 0.16, 95% CI -0.05 to 0.36; 1 study; N = 359). Mental health-related QOL may slightly improve (SMD 0.28, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49; 1 study, N = 359; low-certainty evidence).It is uncertain if interventions targeting healthcare professionals compared to interventions of the same type increase SDM whether measured by observation (SMD -0.30, 95% CI -1.19 to 0.59; 1 study; N = 20) or reported by patients (SMD 0.24, 95% CI -0.10 to 0.58; 2 studies; N = 1459) as the certainty of the evidence is very low. There was insufficient information to determine the effect on decision regret, physical or mental health-related QOL, consultation length or costs.Twenty-eight studies targeted both patients and healthcare professionals. The interventions used a combination of patient-mediated and healthcare professional directed interventions. Based on low certainty evidence, it is uncertain whether these interventions, when compared with usual care, increase SDM whether measured by observation (SMD 1.10, 95% CI 0.42 to 1.79; 6 studies; N = 1270) or reported by patients (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.28; 7 studies; N = 1479); (RD -0.01, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.19; 2 studies; N = 266); improve physical (SMD 0.08, -0.37 to 0.54; 1 study; N = 75) or mental health-related QOL (SMD 0.01, -0.44 to 0.46; 1 study; N = 75), affect consultation length (SMD 3.72, 95% CI 3.44 to 4.01; 1 study; N = 36) or costs (no data available) and may make little or no difference to decision regret (SMD 0.13, 95% CI -0.08 to 0.33; 1 study; low-certainty evidence).It is uncertain whether interventions targeting both patients and healthcare professionals compared to interventions of the same type increase SDM whether measured by observation (SMD -0.29, 95% CI -1.17 to 0.60; 1 study; N = 20); (RD -0.04, 95% CI -0.13 to 0.04; 1 study; N = 134) or reported by patients (SMD 0.00, 95% CI -0.32 to 0.32; 1 study; N = 150 ) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. There was insuffient information to determine the effects on decision regret, physical or mental health-related quality of life, or consultation length or costs.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

It is uncertain whether any interventions for increasing the use of SDM by healthcare professionals are effective because the certainty of the evidence is low or very low.

Pregnant women's views on how to promote the use of a decision aid for Down syndrome prenatal screening: a theory-informed qualitative study

Background

For pregnant women and their partners, the decision to undergo Down syndrome prenatal screening is difficult. Patient decision aids (PtDA) can help them make an informed decision. We aimed to identify behaviour change techniques (BCTs) that would be useful in an intervention to promote the use of a PtDA for Down syndrome prenatal screening, and to identify which of these BCTs pregnant women found relevant and acceptable.

Methods

Using the Behaviour Change Wheel and the Theoretical Domains Framework, we conducted a qualitative descriptive study. First, a group of experts from diverse professions, disciplines and backgrounds (eg. medicine, engineering, implementation science, community and public health, shared decision making) identified relevant BCTs. Then we recruited pregnant women consulting for prenatal care in three clinical sites: a family medicine group, a birthing centre (midwives) and a hospital obstetrics department in Quebec City, Canada. To be eligible, participants had to be at least 18 years old, having recently given birth or at least 16 weeks pregnant with a low-risk pregnancy, and have already decided about prenatal screening. We conducted three focus groups and asked questions about the relevance and acceptability of the BCTs. We analysed verbatim transcripts and reduced the BCTs to those the women found most relevant and acceptable.

Results

Our group of experts identified 25 relevant BCTs relating to information, support, consequences, others’ approval, learning, reward, environmental change and mode of delivery. Fifteen women participated in the study with a mean age of 27 years. Of these, 67% (n = 10) were pregnant for the first time, 20% (n = 3) had difficulty making the decision to take the test, and 73% had made the decision with their partner. Of the 25 BCTs identified using the Behaviour Change Wheel, the women found the following 10 to be most acceptable and relevant: goal setting (behaviour), goal setting (results), problem solving, action plan, social support (general), social support (practical), restructuring the physical environment, prompts/cues, credible sources and modelling or demonstration of the behaviour.

Conclusions

An intervention to promote PtDA use among pregnant women for Down syndrome prenatal screening should incorporate the 10 BCTs identified.

Effect of Disclosing Genetic Risk for Coronary Heart Disease on Information Seeking and Sharing: The MI-GENES Study (Myocardial Infarction Genes)

BACKGROUND

Whether disclosing genetic risk for coronary heart disease (CHD) to individuals influences information seeking and information sharing is not known. We hypothesized that disclosing genetic risk for CHD to individuals influences information seeking and sharing.

METHODS AND RESULTS

The MI-GENES study (Myocardial Infarction Genes) randomized participants (n=203) aged 45 to 65 years who were at intermediate CHD risk based on conventional risk factors and not on statins to receive their conventional risk score alone or also a genetic risk score based on 28 variants. CHD risk was disclosed by a genetic counselor and then discussed with a physician. Surveys assessing information seeking were completed before and after risk disclosure. Information sharing was assessed post-disclosure. Six-month post-disclosure, genetic risk score participants were more likely than conventional risk score participants to visit a website to learn about CHD (odds ratio [OR], 4.88 [confidence interval (CI), 1.55-19.13]; P=0.01), use the internet for information about how genetic factors affect CHD risk (OR, 2.11 [CI, 1.03-4.47]; P=0.04), access their CHD risk via a patient portal (OR, 2.99 [CI, 1.35-7.04]; P=0.01), and discuss their CHD risk with others (OR, 3.13 [CI, 1.41-7.47]; P=0.01), particularly their siblings (OR, 1.92 [CI, 1.06-3.51]; P=0.03), extended family (OR, 3.8 [CI, 1.37-12.38]; P=0.01), coworkers (OR, 2.42 [CI, 1.09-5.76]; P=0.03), and primary care provider (PCP; OR, 2.00 [CI, 1.08-3.75]; P=0.03).

CONCLUSIONS

Disclosure of a genetic risk score for CHD increased information seeking and sharing.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/. Unique identifier: NCT01936675.