Decision aid for patients considering total knee arthroplasty with preference report for surgeons: a pilot randomized controlled trial

OMERACT Core outcome measurement set for shared decision making in rheumatic and musculoskeletal conditions: a scoping review to identify candidate instruments

OBJECTIVES

Shared decision making (SDM) is a central tenet in rheumatic and musculoskeletal care. The lack of standardization regarding SDM instruments and outcomes in clinical trials threatens the comparative effectiveness of interventions. The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) SDM Working Group is developing a Core Outcome Set for trials of SDM interventions in rheumatology and musculoskeletal health. The working group reached consensus on a Core Outcome Domain Set in 2020. The next step is to develop a Core Outcome Measurement Set through the OMERACT Filter 2.2.

METHODS

We conducted a scoping review (PRISMA-ScR) to identify candidate instruments for the OMERACT Filter 2.2 We systematically reviewed five databases (Ovid MEDLINE®, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL and Web of Science). An information specialist designed search strategies to identify all measurement instruments used in SDM studies in adults or children living with rheumatic or musculoskeletal diseases or their important others. Paired reviewers independently screened titles, abstracts, and full text articles. We extracted characteristics of all candidate instruments (e.g., measured construct, measurement properties). We classified candidate instruments and summarized evidence gaps with an adapted version of the Summary of Measurement Properties (SOMP) table.

RESULTS

We found 14,464 citations, read 239 full text articles, and included 99 eligible studies. We identified 220 potential candidate instruments. The five most used measurement instruments were the Decisional Conflict Scale (traditional and low literacy versions) (n=38), the Hip/Knee-Decision Quality Instrument (n=20), the Decision Regret Scale (n=9), the Preparation for Decision Making Scale (n=8), and the CollaboRATE (n=8). Only 44 candidate instruments (20%) had any measurement properties reported by the included studies. Of these instruments, only 57% matched with at least one of the 7-criteria adapted SOMP table.

CONCLUSION

We identified 220 candidate instruments used in the SDM literature amongst people with rheumatic and musculoskeletal diseases. Our classification of instruments showed evidence gaps and inconsistent reporting of measurement properties. The next steps for the OMERACT SDM Working Group are to match candidate instruments with Core Domains, assess feasibility and review validation studies of measurement instruments in rheumatic diseases or other conditions. Development and validation of new instruments may be required for some Core Domains.

Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions

BACKGROUND

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

OBJECTIVES

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

SEARCH METHODS

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

SELECTION CRITERIA

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

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

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

MAIN RESULTS

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

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

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

The impact of a patient decision aid on treatment choices after anterior cruciate ligament injuries

PURPOSE

The present study aimed to investigate whether exposure to a patient decision aid (PDA) had an impact on the proportion of patients selecting non-surgical or surgical treatments after anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) injuries and whether exposure to a PDA affected the proportion of patients switching from non-surgical to surgical treatment within the first year.

METHODS

In a consecutive case series, proportions of surgery and non-surgery were compared before and after patients' exposure to a PDA. Data were collected from the health records of patients with ACL injuries who presented to the Clinic of Sports Traumatology. To identify proportional differences between the two groups, t-tests and proportion tests were used.

RESULTS

In total, 1,053 patients with ACL injuries were included: 563 patients with no exposure to the PDA (January 2015 to January 2017) and 490 patients with exposure to the PDA (January 2017 to January 2019). Before implementing the PDA, 27% of the patients selected non-surgical treatment. After implementing the PDA, 30% choose non-surgical treatment (p > 0.05). Before implementing the PDA, 21% of patients who initially chose non-surgical treatment had surgery within the first year. After implementation of the PDA, this number fell to 16%, but the difference was not statistically significant (p > 0,05).

CONCLUSION

Exposure to the PDA did not significantly alter the proportion of ACL injury patients selecting non-surgical or surgical treatments or the proportion of patients switching to surgery within the first year.

Developing a patient decision aid for Achilles tendon rupture management: a mixed-methods study

OBJECTIVE

To develop and user-test a patient decision aid portraying the benefits and harms of non-surgical management and surgery for Achilles tendon ruptures.

DESIGN

Mixed methods.

SETTING

A draft decision aid was developed using guidance from a multidisciplinary steering group and existing patient decision aids. Participants were recruited through social media.

PARTICIPANTS

People who have previously sustained an Achilles tendon rupture and health professionals who manage these patients.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOMES

Semi-structured interviews and questionnaires were used to gather feedback on the decision aid from health professionals and patients who had previously suffered an Achilles tendon rupture. The feedback was used to redraft the decision aid and assess acceptability. An iterative cycle of interviews, redrafting according to feedback and further interviews was used. Interviews were analysed using reflexive thematic analysis. Questionnaire data were analysed descriptively.

RESULTS

We interviewed 18 health professionals (13 physiotherapists, 3 orthopaedic surgeons, 1 chiropractor, 1 sports medicine physician) and 15 patients who had suffered an Achilles tendon rupture (median time since rupture was 12 months). Most health professionals and patients rated the aid's acceptability as good-excellent. Interviews showcased agreement among health professionals and patients on most aspects of the decision aid: introduction, treatment options, comparing benefits and harms, questions to ask health professionals and formatting. However, health professionals had differing views on details about Achilles tendon retraction distance, factors that modify the risk of harms, treatment protocols and evidence on benefits and harms.

CONCLUSION

Our patient decision aid is an acceptable tool to both patients and health professionals, and our study highlights the views of key stakeholders on important information to consider when developing a patient decision aid for Achilles tendon rupture management. A randomised controlled trial evaluating the impact of this tool on the decision-making of people considering Achilles tendon surgery is warranted.

Efficacy of Video-based Education in Improving Understanding of Pediatric Fertility Preservation

Eighty percent of children diagnosed with cancer in childhood survive into adulthood. Fertility preservation (FP) is an important consideration, and procedures are available to reduce the risk of infertility following gonadotoxic therapies. Discussing FP options eases decision-making and minimizes regret; however, poor comprehension of these topics remains a challenge. This study evaluates if video-based educational tools increase understanding of FP options among pediatric patients and families. Videos were first tested among participants not at risk of infertility to ensure objective utility and optimize quality. In part 1, parents of pediatric surgical patients were randomized to view 2 publicly available educational videos on FP in differing orders. Each group completed pre-surveys and post-surveys assessing the comprehension and perception of video quality. In part 2, the parent and patient participants completed a comprehension assessment before and after viewing our institution-specific educational video, designed based on participant feedback from part 1. Part 1 results demonstrated a significant increase in participant knowledge and perceived understanding after viewing the videos ( P <0.001), regardless of order. In part 2, the post-test comprehension scores were significantly improved for all participants and all subgroups, P <0.01. Results suggest that video-based educational tools may help to reduce barriers to FP in pediatric oncology.

Toward Enhanced Clinical Decision Support for Patients Undergoing a Hip or Knee Replacement: Focus Group and Interview Study With Surgeons

BACKGROUND

The current assessment of recovery after total hip or knee replacement is largely based on the measurement of health outcomes through self-report and clinical observations at follow-up appointments in clinical settings. Home activity-based monitoring may improve assessment of recovery by enabling the collection of more holistic information on a continuous basis.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to introduce orthopedic surgeons to time-series analyses of patient activity data generated from a platform of sensors deployed in the homes of patients who have undergone primary total hip or knee replacement and understand the potential role of these data in postoperative clinical decision-making.

METHODS

Orthopedic surgeons and registrars were recruited through a combination of convenience and snowball sampling. Inclusion criteria were a minimum required experience in total joint replacement surgery specific to the hip or knee or familiarity with postoperative recovery assessment. Exclusion criteria included a lack of specific experience in the field. Of the 9 approached participants, 6 (67%) orthopedic surgeons and 3 (33%) registrars took part in either 1 of 3 focus groups or 1 of 2 interviews. Data were collected using an action-based approach in which stimulus materials (mock data visualizations) provided imaginative and creative interactions with the data. The data were analyzed using a thematic analysis approach.

RESULTS

Each data visualization was presented sequentially followed by a discussion of key illustrative commentary from participants, ending with a summary of key themes emerging across the focus group and interview data set.

CONCLUSIONS

The limitations of the evidence are as follows. The data presented are from 1 English hospital. However, all data reflect the views of surgeons following standard national approaches and training. Although convenience sampling was used, participants' background, skills, and experience were considered heterogeneous. Passively collected home monitoring data offered a real opportunity to more objectively characterize patients' recovery from surgery. However, orthopedic surgeons highlighted the considerable difficulty in navigating large amounts of complex data within short medical consultations with patients. Orthopedic surgeons thought that a proposed dashboard presenting information and decision support alerts would fit best with existing clinical workflows. From this, the following guidelines for system design were developed: minimize the risk of misinterpreting data, express a level of confidence in the data, support clinicians in developing relevant skills as time-series data are often unfamiliar, and consider the impact of patient engagement with data in the future.

INTERNATIONAL REGISTERED REPORT IDENTIFIER (IRRID)

RR2-10.1136/bmjopen-2018-021862.

Shared decision-making in pediatric surgery: An overview of its application for the treatment of uncomplicated appendicitis

Nonoperative management (NOM) of uncomplicated appendicitis is a safe and effective treatment alternative to surgery that may be preferred by some families. Surgery and NOM differ significantly in their associated risks and benefits. Choosing a treatment for acute appendicitis requires patients and their caregivers to make timely, informed decisions that allow for incorporation of personal perspectives, values, and preferences. This article will address the concept of shared decision-making and establish its role in patient-centered care. It will demonstrate the effectiveness of shared decision-making in a high acuity surgical setting for children and highlight how the choice for management of acute appendicitis may be impacted by patients' and families' individualized circumstances and values.

Instruments to assess appropriateness of hip and knee arthroplasty: a systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To assess criteria and psychometric properties of instruments for assessing appropriateness of elective joint arthroplasty (JA) for adults with primary hip and knee osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

A systematic review guided by Cochrane methods and PRISMA guidelines. Studies were searched in five databases. Eligible articles include all study designs developing, testing, and/or using an instrument to assess JA appropriateness. Two independent reviewers screened and extracted data. Instruments were compared with Hawker et al. JA consensus criteria. Psychometric properties of instruments were described and appraised guided by Fitzpatrick's and COSMIN approaches.

RESULTS

Of 55 instruments included, none met all Hawker et al. JA consensus criteria. Criteria the most met were pain (n = 50), function (n = 49), quality of life (n = 33), and radiography (n = 24). Criteria the least met were clinical evidence of OA (n = 18), expectations (n = 15), readiness for surgery (n = 11), conservative treatments (n = 8), and patient/surgeon agree benefits outweigh risks (n = 0). Instrument by Arden et al. met the most criteria (6 of 9). The most tested psychometric properties were appropriateness (n = 55), face/content validity (n = 55), predictive validity (n = 29), construct validity and feasibility (n = 24). The least tested psychometric properties were intra-rater reliability (n = 3), internal consistency (n = 5), and inter-rater reliability (n = 13). Instruments by Gutacker et al. and Osborne et al. met the most psychometric properties (4 of 10).

CONCLUSION

Most instruments included traditional criteria for assessing JA appropriateness but did not include a trial of conservative treatments or shared decision-making elements. There was limited evidence on psychometric properties.

Effect of Information Content and General Practitioner Recommendation to Exercise on Treatment Beliefs and Intentions for Knee Osteoarthritis: An Online Multi-Arm Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate effects of general osteoarthritis (OA) information in addition to a treatment option grid and general practitioner (GP) recommendation to exercise on treatment beliefs and intentions.

METHODS

An online randomized trial of 735 people 45 years old or older without OA who were recruited from a consumer survey network. Participants read a hypothetical scenario about visiting their GP for knee problems and were randomized to the following: i) 'general information', ii) 'option grid' (general information plus option grid), or iii) 'option grid plus recommendation' (general information plus option grid plus GP exercise recommendation). The primary outcome was an agreement that exercise is the best management option (0-10 numeric rating scale; higher scores indicating higher agreement that exercise is best). The secondary outcomes were beliefs about other management options and management intentions. Linear regression models estimated the mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) between-group difference in postintervention scores, adjusted for baseline.

RESULTS

Option grid plus recommendation led to higher agreement that exercise is the best management by a mean of 0.4 units (95% CI: 0.1-0.6) compared with general information. There were no other between-group differences for the primary outcome. Option grid led to higher agreement that surgery was best, and x-rays were necessary, compared with general information (mean between-group differences: 0.7 [CI: 0.2-1.1] and 0.5 [CI: 0.1-1.0], respectively) and option grid plus recommendation (0.5 [CI: 0.1-0.9] and 0.9 [CI: 0.4-1.3]).

CONCLUSION

Addition of an option grid and GP exercise recommendation to general OA information led to more favorable views that exercise was best for the hypothetical knee problem. However, differences were small and of unclear clinical importance.

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

OBJECTIVE

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

METHODS

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

RESULTS

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

CONCLUSIONS

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

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

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

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Australia New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ACTRN12621000992808).

The development and utility of a multicriteria patient decision aid for people contemplating treatment for osteoarthritis

BACKGROUND

There are a range of treatment options for osteoarthritis (OA) of the knee and hip, each with a unique profile of risks and benefits. Patient decision aids can help incorporate patient preferences in treatment decision-making. The aim of this study was to develop and test the utility of a patient decision aid for OA that was developed using a multicriteria decision analytic framework.

METHODS

People contemplating treatment for OA who had accessed the website myjointpain.org.au were invited to participate in the study by using the online patient decision aid. Two forms of the patient decision aid were created: A shorter form and a longer form, which allowed greater customization that was offered to respondents after they had completed the shorter form. Respondents also completed questions asking about their experience using the patient decision aid.

RESULTS

A total of 625 self-selected respondents completed the short-form and 180 completed the long-form. Across both forms, serious side effects, pain and function were rated as the most important treatment outcomes. Most respondents (64%) who completed the longer form reported that using the tool was a positive experience, 38% reported that using the tool had changed their mind and 48% said that using the tool would improve the quality of their decision-making.

CONCLUSIONS

Overall, the findings suggest that this patient decision aid may be of use to a substantial number of people in facilitating appropriate treatment decision-making.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Service users of myjointpain.org.au were involved through their participation in the study, and their feedback will guide the development of future iterations of the tool.

The role of digital health interventions to improve health literacy in surgical patients: a narrative review in arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Arthroplasty is a high-volume but costly treatment option for advanced osteoarthritis. Health literacy and patient education are modifiable factors that can improve patient outcomes in arthroplasty. Digital technologies show potential as an instrument for providing patients with reliable information. This narrative review aimed to identify the current evidence for how effective digital health interventions (DHIs) are in targeting health literacy and related constructs (including knowledge, decision-making and self-efficacy) in arthroplasty.

METHODS

Six databases were searched for published studies comprising health literacy and related constructs, arthroplasty, and DHIs. The main outcome measure was health literacy. Two reviewer-authors independently screened studies according to predefined inclusion criteria and performed data extraction. Data was analysed and summarized in tabular and narrative form.

RESULTS

Two thousand seven-hundred and sixty-four titles and abstracts were screened. One hundred and sixty-seven papers underwent full-text analysis. No studies used health literacy as an outcome measure; therefore, the outcome measure was broadened to include its constructs, and the full-text analysis was repeated. Thirteen studies were included. No study following a structured design for their DHI. Eleven studies demonstrated participant improvement in constructs of health literacy, including knowledge, decision-making and self-management.

CONCLUSION

Current evidence suggests digital technology may provide new means of educating patients and improving aspects of their health literacy. More research digital technology with a structured approach, framework and standardized measures is required. Well-designed digital technology may become a useful adjunct to future patient care.

ORCA, a values-based decision aid for selecting additional findings from genomic sequencing in adults: Efficacy results from a randomized trial

PURPOSE

Individuals having genomic sequencing can choose to be notified about pathogenic variants in genes unrelated to the testing indication. A decision aid can facilitate weighing one's values before making a choice about these additional results.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized trial (N = 231) comparing informed values-choice congruence among adults at risk for a hereditary cancer syndrome who viewed either the Optional Results Choice Aid (ORCA) or web-based additional findings information alone. ORCA is values-focused with a low-literacy design.

RESULTS

Individuals in both arms had informed values-choice congruence (75% and 73% in the decision aid and web-based groups, respectively; odds ratio [OR] = 1.10, 95% CI = 0.58-2.08). Most participants had adequate knowledge (79% and 76% in the decision aid and web-based groups, respectively; OR = 1.20, 95% CI = 0.61-2.34), with no significant difference between groups. Most had information-seeking values (97% and 98% in the decision aid and web-based groups, respectively; OR = 0.59, 95% CI = 0.10-3.61) and chose to receive additional findings.

CONCLUSION

The ORCA decision aid did not significantly improve informed values-choice congruence over web-based information in this cohort of adults deciding about genomic results. Both web-based approaches may be effective for adults to decide about receiving medically actionable additional results.

Evaluation of a decision aid for the treatment of depression among college students

Objective: Depression, and its treatment, is a concern among college students. Research indicates decision aids (DA) improve patients' treatment knowledge, decision making, and decisional conflict; however, it is unknown whether they are helpful for disseminating depression treatment information to college students. This study evaluated a DA for depression and its impact on college students' knowledge and treatment decision making. Methods: College students (N = 144) completed questionnaires pre-, post-, and at 1-month follow-up after reviewing an evidence-based DA for depression. Results: Participants rated the DA as highly acceptable and useful, and their knowledge increased at post-treatment and follow-up. However, treatment option presentation order influenced decision making. Conclusions: This DA is a useful and acceptable decision-making tool, and increased knowledge of depression and its treatment among college students. This study proposes a novel tool for educating college students about depression treatment, furthering our understanding of factors influencing treatment preferences.

Shared Decision-Making Is Associated with Better Outcomes in Patients with Knee But Not Hip Osteoarthritis: The DECIDE-OA Randomized Study

BACKGROUND

Current guidelines recommend shared surgical decision-making, yet it is unclear whether shared decision-making improves health outcomes in patients who are considering knee and hip replacement. The purpose of the present study was to examine whether patients who made high-quality, informed, patient-centered (IPC) decisions had better health outcomes, higher satisfaction, and less decision regret compared with those who made lower-quality decisions.

METHODS

A multisite, randomized study of 2 decision aids for patients with hip and knee osteoarthritis was utilized to collect data on decision-making and health outcomes at 2 time points: shortly after the initial surgical evaluation and about 6 months after treatment. We calculated the percentage of patients who made an IPC decision and examined the a priori hypotheses that IPC decisions would be associated with better health outcomes, satisfaction, and less regret at 6 months. Linear and logistic regression models were utilized to examine the relationships.

RESULTS

The analytic sample included 854 patients with a mean age of 65 years (standard deviation, 9 years), of whom 58% were female, 93% were White non-Hispanic, 67% had knee (compared with hip) osteoarthritis, and 62% underwent operative treatment within 6 months of the initial evaluation. The majority of patients (68%) made IPC decisions. The IPC group had significantly larger gains in quality of life (mean difference in EuroQol-5 Dimension, 0.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.02 to 0.07; p < 0.001) compared with the non-IPC group. For knee patients, the IPC group also had significantly better Knee injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Scores (mean difference, 4.9; 95% CI, 1.5 to 8.3; p = 0.004), higher satisfaction (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.7; 95% CI, 1.2 to 2.3; p = 0.003), much better pain relief (aOR, 2.1; 95% CI, 1.3 to 3.5; p = 0.002), and were more likely to have no decision regret (aOR, 2.3; 95% CI, 1.3 to 4.1; p = 0.003). For hip patients, IPC decisions were not associated with better Harris hip scores or satisfaction and were associated with more regret.

CONCLUSIONS

Higher-quality decisions predicted small improvements in health outcomes, as well as greater satisfaction and less regret for patients with knee osteoarthritis, but not for patients with hip osteoarthritis.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic Level II. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.

Decision aids can decrease decisional conflict in patients with hip or knee osteoarthritis: Randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

The interest in shared decision making has increased considerably over the last couple of decades. Decision aids (DAs) can help in shared decision making. Especially when there is more than one reasonable option and outcomes between treatments are comparable.

AIM

To investigate if the use of DAs decreases decisional conflict in patients when choosing treatment for knee or hip osteoarthritis (OA).

METHODS

In this multi-center unblinded randomized controlled trial of patients with knee or hip OA were included from four secondary and tertiary referral centers. One-hundred-thirty-one patients who consulted an orthopedic surgeon for the first time with knee or hip OA were included between December 2014 and January 2016. After the first consultation, patients were randomly assigned by a computer to the control group which was treated according to standard care, or to the intervention group which was treated with standard care and provided with a DA. After the first consultation, patients were asked to complete questionnaires about decisional conflict (DCS), satisfaction, anxiety (PASS-20), gained knowledge, stage of decision making and preferred treatment. Follow-up was carried out after 26 wk and evaluated decisional conflict, satisfaction, anxiety, health outcomes (HOOS/KOOS), quality of life (EQ5D) and chosen treatment.

RESULTS

After the first consultation, patients in the intervention group (mean DCS: 25 out of 100, SD: 13) had significantly (P value: 0.00) less decisional conflict compared to patients in the control group (mean DCS: 39 out of 100, SD 11). The mean satisfaction score for the given information (7.6 out of 10, SD: 1.8 vs 8.6 out of 10, SD: 1.1) (P value: 0.00), mean satisfaction score with the physician (8.3 out of 10, SD: 1.7 vs 8.9 out of 10, SD: 0.9) (P value: 0.01) and the mean knowledge score (3.3 out of 4, SD: 0.9 vs 3.7 out of, SD: 0.6) (P value: 0.01) were all significantly higher in the intervention group. At 26-wk follow-up, only 75 of 131 patients (57%) were available for analysis. This sample is too small for meaningful analysis.

CONCLUSION

Providing patients with an additional DA may have a positive effect on decisional conflict after the first consultation. Due to loss to follow-up we are unsure if this effect remains over time.

Relationships among Antecedents, Processes, and Outcomes for Shared Decision Making: A Cross-Sectional Survey of Patients with Lumbar Degenerative Disease

BACKGROUND

Among musculoskeletal disorders, lumbar degenerative disease (LDD) is the leading cause of total disability-adjusted life years globally. Clinical guidelines for LDD describe multiple treatment options in which shared decision making becomes appropriate.

OBJECTIVES

To explore the relationships among measures of decision antecedents, process, and outcomes in patients with LDD.

METHODS

Patients with LDD were recruited from outpatient clinics in a teaching hospital in Taiwan and administered surveys to collect measures of decision antecedents, processes, and outcomes. Multiple linear regression was conducted to assess the association between decision antecedents and the decision making process. Hierarchical linear regression was conducted to assess the relationships among decision antecedents, the decision making process, and decision outcomes.

RESULTS

A total of 132 patients (mean age, 61 years) completed the survey. After adjustment for personal factors, 2 decision antecedents (namely, decision making self-efficacy and readiness) significantly predicted patients' experiences of engaging in shared decision making (SDM). Decision making readiness and process were associated with fewer decisional conflicts and greater decision satisfaction.

LIMITATIONS

Models derived from cross-sectional surveys cannot establish causal relationships among decision antecedents, decision making processes, and decision outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results support the SDM framework, which proposes relationships among decision antecedents, the decision making process, and decision outcomes.

Effectiveness of patient decision aids for total hip and knee arthroplasty decision-making: a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

To determine the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) compared to alternative interventions (including usual care) on decision quality and quality of the decision-making process for adults with hip and knee osteoarthritis considering primary elective total joint arthroplasty.

METHODS

A systematic review guided by Cochrane methods and PRISMA reporting guidelines. Studies were searched in five databases. Included studies were RCTs evaluating the effect of PtDAs on total joint arthroplasty decision-making. Study quality was appraised with Cochrane's risk of bias tool. Quality and strength of recommendations were appraised with GRADE.

RESULTS

Ten included studies were conducted in North American using the same PtDA. Compared to usual care, PtDA groups demonstrated increased decision quality (e.g., higher knowledge, more informed values-based choices) and quality of the decision making process (e.g., decreased decisional conflict) (6 trials). Secondary outcomes showed increased surgeon satisfaction within the consultation and no difference in patient satisfaction or uptake of the chosen option (surgery: RR 1.03, 95% CI = 0.84 to 1.25; I² = 66%; 4 trials). When PtDAs formtats were compared, there were similar effects but no difference between PtDAs (4 trials).

CONCLUSIONS

There was low to very low GRADE certainty of evidence for the effect of PtDAs on decision quality and quality of the decision-making process compared to usual care. No differences were found when different formats of PtDAs were compared (moderate to very low GRADE certainty of evidence).

Effectiveness of a decision aid for patients with knee osteoarthritis: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To assess the effectiveness of a Patient Decision Aid (PtDA) for knee osteoarthritis.

METHOD

Randomized controlled trial, in which 193 patients were allocated to the PtDA or usual care. Outcome measures were the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), knowledge of osteoarthritis and arthroplasty, satisfaction with the decision-making process (SDMP) and treatment preference, assessed immediately after the intervention. At 6 months, the same measures were applied in non-operated patients, whereas those who underwent arthroplasty completed the SDMP and the Decisional Regret Scale (DRS).

RESULTS

The PtDA produced a significant immediate improvement of decisional conflict (MD = -11.65, 95%CI: -14.93, -8.37), objective knowledge (MD = 10.37, 99%IC: 3.15, 17.70) and satisfaction (MD = 6.77, 99%CI: 1.19, 12.34), and a different distribution of preferences (χ² = 8.74, p = 0.033). Patients with less than secondary education obtained a stronger effect on decisional conflict (p = 0.015 for the interaction) but weaker for knowledge (p = 0.051). At 6 months, there were no significant differences in any variable, including the rate of total knee replacement. Operated patients showed a low level of regret, which was not affected by the intervention.

CONCLUSION

The PtDA is effective immediately after its application, but it shows no effects in the medium-term. Future research should investigate which subgroups of patients could benefit more from this intervention, as well as the longitudinal evolution of decision-related psychological variables.

Patient Engagement Approaches in Total Joint Arthroplasty: A Review of Two Decades

Patient engagement is a comprehensive approach to health care where the physician inspires confidence in the patient to be involved in their own care. Most research studies of patient engagement in total joint arthroplasty (TJA) have come in the past 5 years (2015-2020), with no reviews investigating the different patient engagement methods in TJA. The primary purpose of this review is to examine patient engagement methods in TJA. The search identified 31 studies aimed at patient engagement methods in TJA. Based on our review, the conclusions therein strongly suggest that patient engagement methods in TJA demonstrate benefits throughout care delivery through tools focused on promoting involvement in decision making and accessible care delivery (eg, virtual rehabilitation, remote monitoring). Future work should understand the influence of social determinants on patient involvement in care, and overall cost (or savings) of engagement methods to patients and society.

Clinical decision support system RHINA in the diagnosis and treatment of acute or chronic rhinosinusitis

Background

Rhinosinusitis is an inflammation of the sinonasal cavity which affects roughly one in seven people per year. Acute rhinosinusitis (ARS) is mostly, apart from allergic etiology, caused by a viral infection and, in some cases (30–50%), by a bacterial superinfection. Antibiotics, indicated only in rare cases according to EPOS guidelines, are nevertheless prescribed in more than 80% of ARS cases, which increases the resistant bacterial strains in the population.

Methods

We have designed a clinical decision support system (CDSS), RHINA, based on a web application created in HTML 5, using JavaScript, jQuery, CCS3 and PHP scripting language. The presented CDSS RHINA helps general physicians to decide whether or not to prescribe antibiotics in patients with rhinosinusitis.

Results

In a retrospective study of a total of 1465 patients with rhinosinusitis, the CDSS RHINA presented a 90.2% consistency with the diagnosis and treatment made by the ENT specialist.

Conclusion

Patients assessed with the assistance of our CDSS RHINA would decrease the over-prescription of antibiotics, which in turn would help to reduce the bacterial resistance to the most commonly prescribed antibiotics.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12911-021-01599-3.

Differentiation of COVID-19 signs and symptoms from allergic rhinitis and common cold: An ARIA-EAACI-GA2 LEN consensus

Background

Although there are many asymptomatic patients, one of the problems of COVID‐19 is early recognition of the disease. COVID‐19 symptoms are polymorphic and may include upper respiratory symptoms. However, COVID‐19 symptoms may be mistaken with the common cold or allergic rhinitis. An ARIA‐EAACI study group attempted to differentiate upper respiratory symptoms between the three diseases.

Methods

A modified Delphi process was used. The ARIA members who were seeing COVID‐19 patients were asked to fill in a questionnaire on the upper airway symptoms of COVID‐19, common cold and allergic rhinitis.

Results

Among the 192 ARIA members who were invited to respond to the questionnaire, 89 responded and 87 questionnaires were analysed. The consensus was then reported. A two‐way ANOVA revealed significant differences in the symptom intensity between the three diseases (p < .001).

Conclusions

This modified Delphi approach enabled the differentiation of upper respiratory symptoms between COVID‐19, the common cold and allergic rhinitis. An electronic algorithm will be devised using the questionnaire.

Shared Decision-Making Applied to Knee Arthroplasty: A Systematic Review of Randomized Trials

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making (SDM) is a strongly endorsed approach by which patients and clinicians work together to formulate a sensible care plan. The present study was undertaken to conduct a systematic review of SDM trials in patients considering knee arthroplasty (KA) to characterize how SDM was supported and the impact on care received.

METHODS

We searched multiple bibliographic databases from inception to December 31, 2019. A pair of reviewers working independently selected studies for inclusion, extracted data, and evaluated each trial's risk of bias.

RESULTS

We found 6 eligible randomized trials (4 included KA and hip arthroplasty), all of which tested the same proprietary decision aid (DA) (Treatment Choices for Hip or Knee Osteoarthritis), with some adding other materials to support SDM. These trials, all of which had moderate-to-high risk of bias, focused on assessing the effect of the DA on patient knowledge about the options while not explicitly supporting other aspects of SDM, such as choice awareness, deliberation, or decision-making. One trial found an increase in the number of African American patients undergoing KA in the 12 months following the intervention. No other trials found that SDM impacts clinical outcomes.

CONCLUSION

Evidence for SDM in patients considering KA is mostly limited to a single DA. While use of this DA improves patient knowledge about their treatment options, this tool has not been shown to promote SDM, impact treatment decisions, or satisfaction with care. Future work should seek to support SDM directly and assess effects on treatment decisions, functional outcomes, and satisfaction.

Behavioral and social science research to support accelerated and equitable implementation of long-acting preexposure prophylaxis

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The sociobehavioral research agenda for HIV prevention urgently needs to progress beyond research on end user preferences to examine how to best support patient access, engagement, and choice in the rollout of long-acting modalities. We outline critical challenges for an era of choice in biomedical prevention that could benefit from the rigorous application of sociobehavioral research methods.

RECENT FINDINGS

Research in three areas could accelerate implementation of long-acting antiretrovirals for prevention: integrating dual process models into research on patient decision-making and behavior; identifying strategies that mitigate against unconscious and implicit biases in provider decision-making and behavior; and developing tools to support patient-centered communication that incorporate research in both of the first two areas.

SUMMARY

We encourage the development of dual process models and measures to better understand patient behavior, including behavior related to initiating biomedical prevention, choice of prevention strategy, switching among strategies, and discontinuation. Second, there is the need to develop intervention research that targets provider behavior. Finally, we call for research to inform patient-centered communication tools that integrate an understanding of affective drivers of preexposure prophylaxis (PrEP) decision-making and protect against implicit bias in provider recommendations related to PrEP.

Do Decision Aids Benefit Patients with Chronic Musculoskeletal Pain? A Systematic Review

OBJECTIVE

To review the effect of patient decision aids for adults making treatment decisions regarding the management of chronic musculoskeletal pain.

METHODS

We performed a systematic review of randomized controlled trials of adults using patient decision aids to make treatment decisions for chronic musculoskeletal pain in the outpatient setting.

RESULTS

Of 477 records screened, 17 met the inclusion criteria. Chronic musculoskeletal pain conditions included osteoarthritis of the hip, knee, or trapeziometacarpal joint and back pain. Thirteen studies evaluated the use of a decision aid for deciding between surgical and nonsurgical management. The remaining four studies evaluated decision aids for nonsurgical treatment options. Outcomes included decision quality, pain, function, and surgery utilization. The effects of decision aids on decision-making outcomes were mixed. Comparing decision aids with usual care, all five studies that examined knowledge scores found improvement in patient knowledge. None of the four studies that evaluated satisfaction with the decision-making process found a difference with use of a decision aid. There was limited and inconsistent data on other decision-related outcomes. Of the eight studies that evaluated surgery utilization, seven found no difference in surgery rates with use of a decision aid. Five studies made comparisons between different types of decision aids, and there was no clearly superior format.

CONCLUSIONS

Decision aids may improve patients' knowledge about treatment options for chronic musculoskeletal pain but largely did not impact other outcomes. Future efforts should focus on improving the effectiveness of decision aids and incorporating nonpharmacologic and nonsurgical management options.

HIV Information Acquisition and Use Among Young Black Men Who Have Sex With Men Who Use the Internet: Mixed Methods Study

Background

HIV disproportionately affects young Black men who have sex with men (YBMSM) in the United States. eHealth holds potential for supporting linkage and engagement in HIV prevention and care and the delivery of HIV information to YBMSM.

Objective

This study aims to investigate HIV information acquisition and use among YBMSM who use the internet.

Methods

A web-based self-administered survey and semistructured interviews were conducted. The survey findings informed the development of the interview guide. Descriptive statistics were used to characterize the survey sample, and interview data were analyzed thematically using modified grounded theory methodologies.

Results

Among the internet sample (N=83), the average age was 29.2 (SD 3.5) years, 41% (n=34) of participants self-reported living with HIV, 43% (n=36) were HIV-negative, and 15% (n=13) were unsure of their HIV status. Most participants (n=79, 95%) acquired HIV information through the internet while using a mobile phone. Web-based HIV information was intentionally sought from consumer health information websites (n=31, 37%), government health information websites (n=25, 30%), and social media (n=14, 17%). Most men incidentally acquired HIV information via advertisements on social media sites and geospatial dating apps (n=54, 65%), posts on social media sites from their web-based social ties (n=44, 53%), and advertisements while browsing the internet (n=40, 48%). Although the internet is the top source of HIV information, health care providers were the most preferred (n=42, 50%) and trusted (n=80, 96%) source of HIV information. HIV information was used to facilitate the use of HIV prevention and care services. The qualitative sample included YBMSM across a range of ages and at different points of engagement in HIV prevention and care. Qualitative findings included the importance of the internet as a primary source of HIV information. The internet was used because of its ease of accessibility, because of its ability to maintain anonymity while searching for sensitive information, and to mitigate intersecting stigmas in health care settings. Participants used HIV information to assess their risk for HIV and AIDS, support their skill building for HIV prevention, inform patient–doctor communication, and learn about HIV prevention and treatment options. Men expressed concerns about their diminishing access to online spaces for HIV information exchange among YBMSM because of censorship policies on social media sites and the stigmatizing framing and tone of mass media HIV-prevention advertisements encountered while using the internet.

Conclusions

YBMSM in this sample had high utilization of eHealth for HIV information acquisition and use but diminished access to their preferred and most trusted source of HIV information: health care providers. Future eHealth-based HIV interventions culturally tailored for YBMSM should aim to reduce intersectional stigma at the point of care and support patient–provider communication. The findings demonstrate the need for community-informed, culturally tailored HIV messaging and online spaces for informational support exchange among YBMSM.

Evaluation of a shared decision-making strategy with online decision aids in surgical and orthopaedic practice: study protocol for the E-valuAID, a multicentre study with a stepped-wedge design

BACKGROUND

Inguinal hernia repair, gallbladder removal, and knee- and hip replacements are the most commonly performed surgical procedures, but all are subject to practice variation and variable patient-reported outcomes. Shared decision-making (SDM) has the potential to reduce surgery rates and increase patient satisfaction. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of an SDM strategy with online decision aids for surgical and orthopaedic practice in terms of impact on surgery rates, patient-reported outcomes, and cost-effectiveness.

METHODS

The E-valuAID-study is designed as a multicentre, non-randomized stepped-wedge study in patients with an inguinal hernia, gallstones, knee or hip osteoarthritis in six surgical and six orthopaedic departments. The primary outcome is the surgery rate before and after implementation of the SDM strategy. Secondary outcomes are patient-reported outcomes and cost-effectiveness. Patients in the usual care cluster prior to implementation of the SDM strategy will be treated in accordance with the best available clinical evidence, physician's knowledge and preference and the patient's preference. The intervention consists of the implementation of the SDM strategy and provision of disease-specific online decision aids. Decision aids will be provided to the patients before the consultation in which treatment decision is made. During this consultation, treatment preferences are discussed, and the final treatment decision is confirmed. Surgery rates will be extracted from hospital files. Secondary outcomes will be evaluated using questionnaires, at baseline, 3 and 6 months.

DISCUSSION

The E-valuAID-study will examine the cost-effectiveness of an SDM strategy with online decision aids in patients with an inguinal hernia, gallstones, knee or hip osteoarthritis. This study will show whether decision aids reduce operation rates while improving patient-reported outcomes. We hypothesize that the SDM strategy will lead to lower surgery rates, better patient-reported outcomes, and be cost-effective.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The Netherlands Trial Register, Trial NL8318, registered 22 January 2020. URL: https://www.trialregister.nl/trial/8318 .

Current Status and Future Prospects for Shared Decision Making Before and After Total Knee Replacement Surgery-A Scoping Review

Background. To gain insight into the current state-of-the-art of shared decision making (SDM) during decisions related to pre and postoperative care process regarding primary total knee replacement (TKR). Methods. A scoping review was performed to synthesize existing scientific research regarding (1) decisional needs and preferences of patients preparing for, undergoing and recovering from TKR surgery, (2) the relation between TKR decision-support interventions and SDM elements (i.e., team talk, option talk, and decision talk), (3) the extent to which TKR decision-support interventions address patients' decisional needs and preferences. Results. 2526 articles were identified, of which 17 articles met the inclusion criteria. Of the 17 articles, ten had a qualitative study design and seven had a quantitative study design. All included articles focused on the decision whether to undergo TKR surgery or not. Ten articles (all qualitative) examined patients' decisional needs and preferences. From these, we identified four domains that affected the patients' decision to undergo TKR: (1) personal factors, (2) external factors, (3) information sources and (4) preferences towards outcome prediction. Seven studies (5) randomized controlled trials and 2 cohort studies) used quantitative analyses to probe the effect of decision aids on SDM and/or clinical outcomes. In general, existing decision aids did not appear to be tailored to patient needs and preferences, nor were the principles of SDM well-articulated in the design of decision aids. Conclusions. SDM in TKR care is understudied; existing research appears to be narrow in scope with limited relevance to established SDM principles and the decisional needs of patients undertaking TKR surgery.

A Poster Summarizing the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons Knee Osteoarthritis Clinical Practice Guideline Is a Powerful Tool for Patient Education: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

In 2013, the American Academy of Orthopaedic Surgeons (AAOS) published an evidence-based clinical practice guideline (CPG) on conservative treatment options for patients with knee osteoarthritis (OA). The purpose of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of a poster outlining the AAOS knee OA CPG on patient comprehension and satisfaction in the clinic.

METHODS

This is a prospective 2-armed randomized controlled trial. Patients were eligible if they were of age 40-85 years, had degenerative knee OA, and did not consent for surgery. Patients were randomized to nonposter (standard care) and poster rooms. Knee OA treatment options were described to the patient verbally and posters were used as a teaching tool when present. The main outcomes were comprehension and satisfaction scores on a survey.

RESULTS

Of the 105 patients enrolled, 51 (48.6%) were randomized to usual care (control) and 54 (51.4%) to the intervention (poster). Poster patients outperformed control patients with an average of 55.3% ± 16.7% (mean ± SD) compared to 39.5% ± 13.3% correct answers (P < .001). And 66.7% of poster patients and 29.4% of control patients achieved an adequately informed status of >50% correct answers (P < .001; 50.5% overall). With a maximum possible score of 10, visit satisfaction scores were 9.4 ± 1.0 in poster patients and 9.2 ± 1.7 in control patients (P = .50).

CONCLUSION

Patients educated using an AAOS knee CPG poster showed significant improvements in knowledge and were more likely to achieve an adequately informed status. No difference existed in visit satisfaction. A poster offers a low-cost, effective educational tool.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level 1.

Health Policy in Hand Surgery: Evaluating What Works

Health policy is a complex and fluid topic that addresses care delivery with the goal of improving patient care. Understanding health policy initiatives, their motivation, and their effects, can help ensure hand surgeons are prepared for the changing health care landscape.

Decision Aid Implementation and Patients' Preferences for Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis Treatment: Insights from the High Value Healthcare Collaborative

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) research has emphasized the role of decision aids (DAs) for helping patients make treatment decisions reflective of their preferences, yet there have been few collaborative multi-institutional efforts to integrate DAs in orthopedic consultations and primary care encounters.

OBJECTIVE

In the context of routine DA implementation for SDM, we investigate which patient-level characteristics are associated with patient preferences for surgery versus medical management before and after exposure to DAs. We explored whether DA implementation in primary care encounters was associated with greater shifts in patients' treatment preferences after exposure to DAs compared to DA implementation in orthopedic consultations.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

10 High Value Healthcare Collaborative (HVHC) health systems.

STUDY PARTICIPANTS

A total of 495 hip and 1343 adult knee osteoarthritis patients who were exposed to DAs within HVHC systems between July 2012 to June 2015.

RESULTS

Nearly 20% of knee patients and 17% of hip patients remained uncertain about their treatment preferences after viewing DAs. Older patients and patients with high pain levels had an increased preference for surgery. Older patients receiving DAs from three HVHC systems that transitioned DA implementation from orthopedics into primary care had lower odds of preferring surgery after DA exposure compared to older patients in seven HVHC systems that only implemented DAs for orthopedic consultations.

CONCLUSION

Patients' treatment preferences were largely stable over time, highlighting that DAs for SDM largely do not necessarily shift preferences. DAs and SDM processes should be targeted at older adults and patients reporting high pain levels. Initiating treatment conversations in primary versus specialty care settings may also have important implications for engagement of patients in SDM via DAs.

The Impact Of Decision Aids On Adults Considering Hip Or Knee Surgery

Trials of decision aids developed for use in shared decision making find that patients engaged in that process tend to choose more conservative treatment for preference-sensitive conditions. Shared decision making is a collaborative process in which clinicians and patients discuss trade-offs and benefits of specific treatment options in light of patients' values and preferences. Decision aids are paper, video, or web-based tools intended to help patients match personal preferences with available treatment options. We analyzed data for 2012-15 about patients within the ten High Value Healthcare Collaborative member systems who were exposed to condition-specific decision aids in the context of consultations for hip and knee osteoarthritis, with the intention that the aids be used to support shared decision making. Compared to matched patients not exposed to the decision aids, those exposed had two-and-a-half times the odds of undergoing hip replacement surgery and nearly twice the odds of undergoing knee replacement surgery within six months of the consultation. These findings suggest that health care systems adopting decision aids developed for use in shared decision making, and used in conjunction with hip and knee osteoarthritis consultations, should not expect reduced surgical utilization.

Role of patient preferences in clinical practice guidelines: a multiple methods study using guidelines from oncology as a case

OBJECTIVE

Many treatment decisions are preference-sensitive and call for shared decision-making, notably when benefits are limited or uncertain, and harms impact quality of life. We explored if clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) acknowledge preference-sensitive decisions in how they motivate and phrase their recommendations.

DESIGN

We performed a qualitative analysis of the content of CPGs and verified the results in semistructured interviews with CPG panel members.

SETTING

Dutch oncology CPGs issued in 2010 or later, concerning primary treatment with curative intent.

PARTICIPANTS

14 CPG panel members.

MAIN OUTCOMES

For treatment recommendations from six CPG modules, two researchers extracted the following: strength of recommendation in terms of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation and its consistency with the CPG text; completeness of presentation of benefits and harms; incorporation of patient preferences; statements on the panel's benefits-harm trade-off underlying recommendation; and advice on patient involvement in decision-making.

RESULTS

We identified 32 recommendations, 18 were acknowledged preference-sensitive decisions. Three of 14 strong recommendations should have been weak based on the module text. The reporting of benefits and harms, and their probabilities, was sufficiently complete and clear to inform the strength of the recommendation in one of the six modules only. Numerical probabilities were seldom presented. None of the modules presented information on patient preferences. CPG panel's preferences were not made explicit, but appeared to have impacted 15 of 32 recommendations. Advice to involve patients and their preferences in decision-making was given for 20 recommendations (14 weak). Interviewees confirmed these findings. Explanations for lack of information were, for example, that clinicians know the information and that CPGs must be short. Explanations for trade-offs made were cultural-historical preferences, compliance with daily care, presumed role of CPGs and lack of time.

CONCLUSIONS

The motivation and phrasing of CPG recommendations do not stimulate choice awareness and a neutral presentation of options, thus hindering shared decision-making.

Impact of Timing on Measurement of Decision Quality and Shared Decision Making: Longitudinal Cohort Study of Breast Cancer Patients

Purpose.The objective of this study was to examine whether scores of shared decision-making measures differ when collected shortly after (1 month) or long after (1 year) breast cancer surgical treatment decisions. Methods. Longitudinal, multisite survey of breast cancer (BC) patients, with measurements at 1 month and 1 year after surgery at 4 cancer centers. Patients completed the BC Surgery Decision Quality Instrument (used to generate a knowledge score, ratings of goals, and concordance with treatment preferences) and Shared Decision Making (SDM) Process survey at both time points. We tested several hypotheses related to the scores over time, including whether the scores discriminated between sites that did and did not offer formal decision support services. Exploratory analyses examined factors associated with large increases and decreases in scores over time. Results. Across the 4 sites, 229 patients completed both assessments. The mean total knowledge scores (69.2% [SD 16.6%] at 1 month and 69.4% [SD 17.7%] at 1 year, P = 0.86), SDM Process scores (2.7 [SD 1.1] 1 month v. 2.7 [SD 1.2] 1 year, P = 0.68), and the percentage of patients receiving their preferred treatment (92% at 1 month and 92% at 1 year, P = 1.0) were not significantly different over time. The site using formal decision support had significantly higher knowledge and SDM Process scores at 1 month, and only the SDM Process scores remained significantly higher at 1 year. A significant percentage of patients had large changes in their individual knowledge and SDM Process scores, with increases balancing out decreases. Conclusion. For population-level assessments, it is reasonable to survey BC patients up to a year after the decision, greatly increasing feasibility of measurement. For those evaluating decision support interventions, shorter follow-up is more likely to detect an impact on knowledge scores.

Protocol for a systematic review of randomized trials of knee arthroplasty decision aids and shared decision-making approaches

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is an approach to making treatment-based decisions that rely on the patient encounter and clear discussions between the patient and the healthcare provider. Patients with arthritis of the knee frequently seek care, and depending on arthritis severity and impact on daily life, joint arthroplasty may be considered as a treatment option. We will conduct a systematic review of shared decision-making trials in knee arthroplasty to determine the types of shared decision-making approaches used and their impact on care received.

METHODS

Our systematic review will describe and critically appraise shared decision approaches used in randomized trials of patients undergoing knee arthroplasty, the types of outcomes reported, and the impact of these approaches on the patients' care. We will use the following databases: PubMed, Web of Science, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and the Cochrane Library, from inception through December 2018. Additionally, we will assess ongoing research by querying experts and searching trial registries.

DISCUSSION

This study will characterize shared decision-making (SDM) approaches in knee arthroplasty randomized clinical trials and will summarize their effects of SDM on clinical and patient-reported outcomes. We anticipate this review will bring to light knowledge gaps and inform further research into the design and use of shared decision-making approaches in lower extremity arthroplasty.

SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION

PROSPERO CRD42019123586.

A Review of Decision Aids for Patients Considering More Than One Type of Invasive Treatment

With continuous advances in medicine, patients are faced with several medical or surgical treatment options for their health conditions. Decision aids may be useful in helping patients navigate these options and choose based on their goals and values. We reviewed the literature to identify decision aids and better understand the effect on patient decision-making. We identified 107 decision aids designed to help patients make decisions between medical treatment or screening options; 39 decision aids were used to help patients choose between a medical and surgical treatment, and five were identified that aided patients in deciding between a major open surgical procedure and a less invasive option. Many of the decision aids were used to help patients decide between prostate, colorectal, and breast cancer screening or treatment options. Although most decision aids were not associated with a significant effect on the actual decision made, they were largely associated with increased patient knowledge, decreased decisional conflict, more accurate perception of risks, increased satisfaction with their decision, and no increase in anxiety surrounding their decision. These data identify a gap in use of decision aids in surgical decision-making and highlight the potential to help surgical patients make value-based, knowledgeable decisions regarding their treatment.

Pilot Study Examining Feasibility and Comparing the Effectiveness of Decision Aids for Hip and Knee Osteoarthritis: A Randomized Trial

Background. There are many patient decision aids (DAs) available, yet there is limited evidence on comparative effectiveness of different tools. Objective. To examine feasibility of a study protocol and gather preliminary data on comparative effectiveness. Methods. Adult patients seeing a surgeon to discuss treatment for hip or knee osteoarthritis were randomized to hip and knee DAs from two vendors. Pre-visit survey included Hip/Knee Decision Quality Instrument, DA usage, health literacy, and quality of life (EQ-5D). Surgical status was ascertained 6 months post-visit. We examined response rates, eligibility, and compared the two DAs on amount of use, knowledge scores, and receipt of preferred treatment. Results. Overall response rate was 58/74 (78%) and did not differ by study arm. More patients in DA-A group reported reviewing all the DAs (64.5% DA-A v. 24.0% DA-B, P = 0.003). Knowledge scores were similar across arms (55.2% DA-A v. 48.8% DA-B, P = 0.4). For DA-B, knowledge scores were higher for those who reviewed all the DAs compared with those who did not (80% knowledge v. 39% knowledge, respectively, P = 0.004), while scores for DA-A did not vary by usage (62% knowledge v. 53% knowledge, respectively, P = 0.3). A similar percentage of each group received their preferred treatment (77% v. 73%, P = 0.8). Patients who were unsure about preferred treatment at baseline were more likely to have surgery in the DA-A arm compared with the DA-B arm (55% v. 20%, P = 0.1). Limitations. Small sample; patients were only surveyed pre-visit. Conclusion. Despite having different content and formats, the two DAs had similar overall effectiveness. Patients were more likely to review all of DA-A; however, patients who reviewed all of DA-B had the highest knowledge scores.

An individualized patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) based patient decision aid and surgeon report for patients considering total knee arthroplasty: protocol for a pragmatic randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

While the rates of total knee arthroplasty (TKA) continue to rise worldwide, there are concerns about whether all surgeries are appropriate. Guidelines for appropriateness suggest that patients should have realistic expectations for total knee arthroplasty (TKA), and that the patient and their surgeon should agree that the potential benefits outweigh the potential harms. The objective of this study is to evaluate whether routinely collected pre- and post-TKA patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) could be integrated into a patient decision aid to better inform these appropriateness criteria. This randomised trial will evaluate the preliminary efficacy of a tailored PROM-based patient decision aid and surgeon report (compared to usual care) for patients considering TKA on decision quality.

METHODS

This is a pragmatic, randomised controlled trial conducted at one site in Alberta, Canada. Adults over the age of 30 years, who have been scheduled for a TKA consultation at the Edmonton Bone and Joint Centre with a participating surgeon, who understand, speak, and read English, and can provide informed consent, are eligible to participate. Participants will be randomised to receive a PROM-based patient decision aid and surgeon report before their surgical consultation or usual care. The decision aid will provide patients with information on their expected outcomes based on the EQ-5D-5L PROM, and these estimates are individualized based on clinical and demographic characteristics. The primary outcome of this trial is decision quality. Analysis will consider outcomes intention to treat, and feasibility outcomes for implementing the trial to routine practise.

DISCUSSION

This patient decision aid and surgeon report intervention could contribute to improved treatment decision-making for patients considering total knee arthroplasty.

TRIAL REGISTRATION (REGISTRY AND NUMBER)

ClinicalTrials.gov : NCT03240913. Registered on August 1, 2017.

OMERACT Development of a Core Domain Set of Outcomes for Shared Decision-making Interventions

OBJECTIVE

The Outcome Measures in Rheumatology (OMERACT) Shared Decision Making (SDM) Working Group aims to determine the core outcome domain set for measuring the effectiveness of SDM interventions in rheumatology trials.

METHODS

A white paper was developed to clarify the draft core domain set. It was then used to prepare for interviews to investigate reasons for lack of consensus on it and to suggest further improvements.

RESULTS

OMERACT scientists/clinicians (n = 13) and patients (n = 10) suggested limiting the core domain set to outcome domains, removing process domains, and clarifying remaining domains.

CONCLUSION

A revised core domain set will undergo further consensus-building.

A Framework and Resources for Shared Decision Making: Opportunities for Improved Physical Therapy Outcomes

Shared decision making (SDM) is a collaborative approach between clinicians and patients, where the best available evidence is integrated with patients' values and preferences for managing their health problems. Shared decision making may enhance patient-centered care and increase patients' satisfaction, engagement, adherence, and ability to self-manage their conditions. Despite its potential benefits, SDM is underutilized by physical therapists, and frequent mismatches between patients' and therapists' rehabilitation goals have been reported. Physical therapists can use evidence-based strategies, tools, and techniques to address these problems. This paper presents a model for SDM and explains its association with improved patient outcomes and relevance to situations commonly encountered in physical therapy. It describes freely available resources, including health literacy universal precautions, teach-back, motivational interviewing, decision aids, and patient-reported outcome measures that can help physical therapists integrate SDM into their clinical practices. This paper also explains SDM facilitators and barriers, suggests a theoretical framework to address them, and highlights the need for SDM promotion within physical therapy practice, education, administration, and research.

Characterizing Patient Preferences Surrounding Total Knee Arthroplasty

Background:

Episode-based bundled payments for total knee arthroplasty emphasize cost-effective patient-centered care. Understanding patients’ perceptions of components of the total knee arthroplasty care episode is critical to achieving this care. This study investigated patient preferences for components of the total knee arthroplasty care episode.

Methods:

Best-worst scaling was used to analyze patient preferences for components of the total knee arthroplasty care episode. Participants were selected from patients presenting to 2 orthopaedic clinics with chronic knee pain. They were presented with descriptions of 17 attributes before completing a best-worst scaling exercise. Attribute importance was determined using hierarchical Bayesian estimation. Latent class analysis was used to evaluate varying preference profiles.

Results:

One hundred and seventy-four patients completed the survey, and 117 patients (67%) were female. The mean age was 62.71 years. Participants placed the highest value on surgeon factors, including level of experience, satisfaction rating, and complication rates. Latent class analysis provided a 4-segment model of the population.

Conclusions:

This study demonstrated differences in patient preferences for the components of a total knee arthroplasty care episode and characterized distinct preference profiles among patient subsets. Stakeholders can use this information to focus efforts and policy on high-value components and to potentially create customized bundles guided by preference profiles.

Clinical Relevance:

This study is clinically relevant because the patient preferences identified here may help providers to design customized bundles for total knee arthroplasty care.

Electronic Clinical Decision Support System for allergic rhinitis management: MASK e-CDSS

BACKGROUND

Allergic rhinitis (AR) management has changed in recent years following the switch from the concept of disease severity to the concept of disease control, publication of the AR clinical decision support system (CDSS) and development of mobile health (m-health) tools for patients (eg Allergy Diary). The Allergy Diary Companion app for healthcare providers is currently being developed and will be launched in 2018. It incorporates the AR CDSS to provide evidence-based treatment recommendations, linking all key stakeholders in AR management.

OBJECTIVE

To produce an electronic version of the AR CDSS (e-CDSS) for incorporation into the Allergy Diary Companion, to describe the app interfaces used to collect information necessary to inform the e-CDSS and to summarize some key features of the Allergy Diary Companion.

METHODS

The steps involved in producing the e-CDSS and incorporating it into the Allergy Diary Companion were (a) generation of treatment management scenarios; (b) expert consensus on treatment recommendations; (c) generation of electronic decisional algorithms to describe all AR CDSS scenarios; (d) digitization of these algorithms to form the e-CDSS; and (e) embedding the e-CDSS into the app to permit easy user e-CDSS interfacing.

RESULTS

Key experts in the AR field agreed on the AR CDSS approach to AR management and on specific treatment recommendations provided by Allergy Diary Companion. Based on this consensus, decision processes were developed and programmed into the Allergy Diary Companion using Titanium Appcelerator (JavaScript) for IOS tablets. To our knowledge, this is the first time the development of any m-health tool has been described in this transparent and detailed way, providing confidence, not only in the app, but also in the provided management recommendations.

CONCLUSION

The Allergy Diary Companion for providers provides guideline and expert-endorsed AR management recommendations. [MASK paper No 32].

Military Service and Decision Quality in the Management of Knee Osteoarthritis

Background

Decision quality measures the degree to which care decisions are knowledge-based and value-aligned. Because military service emphasizes hierarchy, command, and mandates some healthcare decisions, military service may attenuate patient autonomy in healthcare decisions and lower decision quality. VA is the nation's largest provider of orthopedic care. We compared decision quality in a sample of VA and non-VA patients seeking care for knee osteoarthritis.

Methods

Our study sample consisted of patients newly referred to our orthopedic clinic for the management of knee osteoarthritis. None of the study patients were exposed to a knee osteoarthritis decision aid. Consenting patients were administered the Hip/Knee Decision Quality Instrument (HK-DQI). In addition, they were surveyed about decision-making preferences and demographics. We compared results to a non-VA cohort from our academic institution's arthroplasty database.

Results

The HK-DQI Knowledge Score was lower in the VA cohort (45%, SD = 22, n = 25) compared with the non-VA cohort (53%, SD = 21, n = 177) (p = 0.04). The Concordance Score was lower in the VA cohort (36%, SD = 49%) compared with the control cohort (70%, SD 46%) (p = 0.003). Non-VA patients were more likely to make a high-quality decision (p = 0.05). Non-VA patients were more likely to favor a shared decision-making process (p = 0.002).

Conclusions

Decision quality is lower in Veterans with knee osteoarthritis compared with civilians, placing them at risk for lower treatment satisfaction and possibly unwarranted surgical utilization. Our future work will examine if this difference is from conditioned military service behaviors or confounding demographic factors, and if conventional shared decision-making techniques will correct this deficiency.

Understanding Patient Preferences in Proximal Interphalangeal Joint Surgery for Osteoarthritis: A Conjoint Analysis

PURPOSE

We sought to compare preferences for arthroplasty versus arthrodesis among patients with proximal interphalangeal (PIP) joint osteoarthritis (OA) by quantifying the patient-assigned utility of each operation's attributes.

METHODS

We undertook a multistep process to identify relevant surgical attributes, including a literature review, surgeon survey, and pretest patient pilot test to build a set of discrete choice experiments. Patients with PIP joint osteoarthritis were identified using a single university electronic medical record and were recruited via electronic message or postcard. Participants completed a demographic survey and 11 discrete choice experiments designed using Sawtooth Software's Discover tool. Utility and importance scores were generated for each attribute.

RESULTS

Pretest analysis identified out-of-pocket cost, joint stiffness, need for future surgery, change in grip strength, and total recovery time as the most important surgical attributes. Initial response rate to the conjoint survey was 75% and survey completion rate was 61%. The study sample was predominantly white (91%) and female (72%), mean age 64.3 years (range, 34-90 years), and mean daily pain score was 4.32 (range, 0-10). Attribute importance scores demonstrated that joint stiffness (32%) and grip strength (29%) were most important to patients. Cost (17%) and need for future surgery (19%) were intermediate patient-preference drivers. Recovery time was the least important attribute (2%).

CONCLUSIONS

In aggregate, patients prefer surgical attributes characteristic of arthroplasty (ability to preserve joint motion and grip strength) relative to those associated with arthrodesis (decreased need for reoperation, lower costs, and shorter reoperation times).

TYPE OF STUDY/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Economic/Decision Analysis III.

Explanation and elaboration of the Standards for UNiversal reporting of patient Decision Aid Evaluations (SUNDAE) guidelines: examples of reporting SUNDAE items from patient decision aid evaluation literature

This Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) article expands on the 26 items in the Standards for UNiversal reporting of Decision Aid Evaluations guidelines. The E&E provides a rationale for each item and includes examples for how each item has been reported in published papers evaluating patient decision aids. The E&E focuses on items key to reporting studies evaluating patient decision aids and is intended to be illustrative rather than restrictive. Authors and reviewers may wish to use the E&E broadly to inform structuring of patient decision aid evaluation reports, or use it as a reference to obtain details about how to report individual checklist items.

Total knee arthroplasty: improving outcomes with a multidisciplinary approach

Total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is the most commonly performed inpatient surgical procedure within the USA and is estimated to reach 3.48 million procedures annually by 2030. As value-based care initiatives continue to focus on hospital readmission rates and patient satisfaction, it has become essential for health care providers to develop and implement a multidisciplinary approach to enhance TKA outcomes while minimizing unnecessary expenditures. Through this necessity, clinical care pathways have been developed to standardize, organize, and improve the quality and efficiency of patient care while simultaneously encouraging the collaboration among various medical care providers. Here, we review several systems based programs and specialty care practices that can be adopted into the standard orthopedic practice.

What Is the Proportion of Studies Reporting Patient and Practitioner Satisfaction with Software Support Tools Used in the Management of Knee Pain and Is This Related to Sample Size, Effect Size, and Journal Impact Factor?

INTRODUCTION

E-health software tools have been deployed in managing knee conditions. Reporting of patient and practitioner satisfaction in studies regarding e-health usage is not widely explored. The objective of this review was to identify studies describing patient and practitioner satisfaction with software use concerning knee pain.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A computerized search was undertaken: four electronic databases were searched from January 2007 until January 2017. Keywords were decision dashboard, clinical decision, Web-based resource, evidence support, and knee. Full texts were scanned for effect of size reporting and satisfaction scales from participants and practitioners. Binary regression was run; impact factor and sample size were predictors with indicators for satisfaction and effect size reporting as dependent variables.

RESULTS

Seventy-seven articles were retrieved; 37 studies were included in final analysis. Ten studies reported patient satisfaction ratings (27.8%): a single study reported both patient and practitioner satisfaction (2.8%). Randomized control trials were the most common design (35%) and knee osteoarthritis the most prevalent condition (38%). Electronic patient-reported outcome measures and Web-based training were the most common interventions. No significant dependency was found within the regression models (p > 0.05).

DISCUSSION AND CONCLUSIONS

The proportion of reporting of patient satisfaction was low; practitioner satisfaction was poorly represented. There may be implications for the suitability of administering e-health, a medium for capturing further meta-evidence needs to be established and used as best practice for implicated studies in future. This is the first review of its kind to address patient and practitioner satisfaction with knee e-health.

Effect of patient decision aid was influenced by presurgical evaluation among patients with osteoarthritis of the knee

BACKGROUND

Decision aids help patients make total joint arthroplasty decisions, but presurgical evaluation might influence the effects of a decision aid. We compared the effects of a decision aid among patients considering total knee arthroplasty at 2 surgical screening clinics with different evaluation processes.

METHODS

We performed a subgroup analysis of a randomized controlled trial. Patients were recruited from 2 surgical screening clinics: an academic clinic providing 20-minute physician consultations and a community clinic providing 45-minute physiotherapist/nurse consultations with education. We compared the effects of decision quality, decisional conflict and surgery rate using Cochran-Mantel-Haenszel χ² tests and the Breslow-Day test.

RESULTS

We evaluated 242 patients: 123 from the academic clinic (61 who used the decision aid and 62 controls) and 119 from the community clinic (59 who used the decision aid and 60 controls). Results suggested a between-site difference in the effect of the decision aid on the patients' decision quality (p = 0.09): at the academic site, patients who used the decision were more likely to make better-quality decisions than controls (54% v. 35%, p = 0.044), but not at the community site (47% v. 51%, p = 0.71). Fewer patients who used decision aids at the academic site than at the community site experienced decisional conflict (p = 0.007) (33% v. 52%, p = 0.05 at the academic site and 40% v. 24%, p = 0.08 at the community site). The effect of the decision aid on surgery rates did not differ between sites (p = 0.65).

CONCLUSION

The decision aid had a greater effect at the academic site than at the community site, which provided longer consultations with more verbal education. Hence, decision aids might be of greater value when more extensive total knee arthroplasty presurgical assessment and counselling are either impractical or unavailable.

Osteoarthritis: Models for appropriate care across the disease continuum

Osteoarthritis (OA) is a leading cause of pain and disability worldwide. Despite the existence of evidence-based treatments and guidelines, substantial gaps remain in the quality of OA management. There is underutilization of behavioral and rehabilitative strategies to prevent and treat OA as well as a lack of processes to tailor treatment selection according to patient characteristics and preferences. There are emerging efforts in multiple countries to implement models of OA care, particularly focused on improving nonsurgical management. Although these programs vary in content and setting, key lessons learned include the importance of support from all stakeholders, consistent program delivery and tools, a coherent team to run the program, and a defined plan for outcome assessment. Efforts are still needed to develop, deliver, and evaluate models of care across the spectrum of OA, from prevention through end-stage disease, in order to improve care for this highly prevalent global condition.