Congruence between patients' preferred and perceived participation in medical decision-making: a review of the literature

Communication Strategies of Transplant Hematologists in High-Risk Decision-Making Conversations

PURPOSE

Shared decision making (SDM) is essential to empower patients with blood cancers to make goal-concordant decisions about allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplantation. This study characterizes communication strategies used by hematologists to discuss treatment options and facilitate SDM with patients in this high-risk, high-reward setting.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We recruited US hematologists who routinely perform allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant through email. Participants conducted up to an hour-long video-recorded encounter with an actor portraying a 67-year-old man with recently diagnosed high-risk myelodysplastic syndrome. We transcribed and qualitatively analyzed video-recorded data.

RESULTS

The mean age of participants (N = 37) was 44 years, 65% male, and 68% White. Many hematologists included similar key points in this initial consultation, although varied in how much detail they provided. Their discussion of treatment options included transplant and chemotherapy and less commonly supportive care or clinical trials. They often emphasized transplant's potential for cure, discussed transplant chronologically from pretransplant considerations through the post-transplant course, and outlined risks, complications, and major outcomes. Hematologists referred to several elements that formed the basis of treatment decision making. The strength of their treatment recommendations ranged from strong recommendations for transplant or chemotherapy to deferrals pending more information. Hematologists also varied in the extent to which they indicated the decision was physician-driven, patient-led, or shared.

CONCLUSION

The transplant decision-making discussion is complex. Identification of similar content areas used by hematologists can be used as the basis for a communication tool to help hematologists discuss allogeneic hematopoietic cell transplant with patients.

Shared decision-making in palliative cancer care: A systematic review and metasynthesis

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is a key element of person-centred care and promoted as the favoured model in preference-sensitive decision-making. Limitations to implementation have been observed, and barriers and limitations, both generally and in the palliative setting, have been highlighted. More knowledge about the process of shared decision-making in palliative cancer care would assist in addressing these limitations.

AIM

To identify and synthesise qualitative data on how people with cancer, informal carers and healthcare professionals experience and perceive shared decision-making in palliative cancer care.

DESIGN

A systematic review and metasynthesis of qualitative studies. We analysed data using inductive thematic analysis.

DATA SOURCES

We searched five electronic databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL and Scopus) from inception until June 2023, supplemented by backward searches.

RESULTS

We identified and included 23 studies, reported in 26 papers. Our analysis produced four analytical themes; (1) Overwhelming situation of 'no choice', (2) Processes vary depending on the timings and nature of the decisions involved, (3) Patient-physician dyad is central to decision-making, with surrounding support and (4) Level of involvement depends on interactions between individuals and systems.

CONCLUSION

Shared decision-making in palliative cancer care is a complex process of many decisions in a challenging, multifaceted and evolving situation where equipoise and choice are limited. Implications for practice: Implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice requires (1) clarifying conceptual confusion, (2) including members of the interprofessional team in the shared decision-making process and (3) adapting the approach to the ambiguous, existential situations which arise in palliative cancer care.

Exploring the landscape of AI-assisted decision-making in head and neck cancer treatment: a comparative analysis of NCCN guidelines and ChatGPT responses

PURPOSE

Recent breakthroughs in natural language processing and machine learning, exemplified by ChatGPT, have spurred a paradigm shift in healthcare. Released by OpenAI in November 2022, ChatGPT rapidly gained global attention. Trained on massive text datasets, this large language model holds immense potential to revolutionize healthcare. However, existing literature often overlooks the need for rigorous validation and real-world applicability.

METHODS

This head-to-head comparative study assesses ChatGPT's capabilities in providing therapeutic recommendations for head and neck cancers. Simulating every NCCN Guidelines scenarios. ChatGPT is queried on primary treatments, adjuvant treatment, and follow-up, with responses compared to the NCCN Guidelines. Performance metrics, including sensitivity, specificity, and F1 score, are employed for assessment.

RESULTS

The study includes 68 hypothetical cases and 204 clinical scenarios. ChatGPT exhibits promising capabilities in addressing NCCN-related queries, achieving high sensitivity and overall accuracy across primary treatment, adjuvant treatment, and follow-up. The study's metrics showcase robustness in providing relevant suggestions. However, a few inaccuracies are noted, especially in primary treatment scenarios.

CONCLUSION

Our study highlights the proficiency of ChatGPT in providing treatment suggestions. The model's alignment with the NCCN Guidelines sets the stage for a nuanced exploration of AI's evolving role in oncological decision support. However, challenges related to the interpretability of AI in clinical decision-making and the importance of clinicians understanding the underlying principles of AI models remain unexplored. As AI continues to advance, collaborative efforts between models and medical experts are deemed essential for unlocking new frontiers in personalized cancer care.

Potential Adverse Outcomes of Shared Decision Making about Palliative Cancer Treatment: A Secondary Analysis of a Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

While shared decision making (SDM) is advocated for ethical reasons and beneficial outcomes, SDM might also negatively affect patients with incurable cancer. The current study explored whether SDM, and an oncologist training in SDM, are associated with adverse outcomes (i.e., patient anxiety, tension, helplessness/hopelessness, decisional uncertainty, and reduced fighting spirit).

DESIGN

A secondary analysis of a randomized clinical trial investigating the effects of SDM interventions in the context of advanced cancer. The relations between observed SDM (OPTION12), specific SDM elements (4SDM), oncologist SDM training, and adverse outcomes were analyzed. We modeled adverse outcomes as a multivariate phenomenon, followed by univariate regressions if significant.

RESULTS

In total, 194 patients consulted by 31 oncologists were included. In a multivariate analysis, observed SDM and adverse outcomes were significantly related. More specifically, more observed SDM in the consultation was related to patients reporting more tension (P = 0.002) and more decisional uncertainty (P = 0.004) at 1 wk after the consultation. The SDM element "informing about the options" was especially found to be related to adverse outcomes, specifically to more helplessness/hopelessness (P = 0.002) and more tension (P = 0.016) at 1 wk after the consultation. Whether the patient consulted an oncologist who had received SDM training or not was not significantly related to adverse outcomes. No relations with long-term adverse outcomes were found.

CONCLUSIONS

It is important for oncologists to realize that for some patients, SDM may temporarily be associated with negative emotions. Further research is needed to untangle which, when, and how adverse outcomes might occur and whether and how burden may be minimized for patients.

HIGHLIGHTS

Observed shared decision making was related to more tension and uncertainty postconsultation in advanced cancer patientsHowever, training oncologists in SDM did not affect adverse outcomes.Further research is needed to untangle which, when, and how adverse outcomes might occur and how burden may be minimized.

Through the Eyes of Patients: The Effect of Training General Practitioners and Nurses on Perceived Shared Decision-Making Support

PURPOSE

To examine the effects of training general practitioners and nurses in shared decision-making (SDM) support as perceived by cancer patients and survivors.

DESIGN

An innovative, experimental design was adopted that included analogue patients (APs), that is, people who have or have had cancer and who imagine themselves in the position of the actor-patient presented in a video. Each AP assessed a video-recorded simulated consultation of a health care professional (HCP) conducted before or after an SDM support training program. The primary outcome was the APs' perceived SDM support with 13 self-developed items reflecting the perceived patient benefit of SDM support as well as the perceived HCP support behavior. Secondary outcomes included an overall rating of SDM support, AP-reported extent of SDM (CollaboRATE), satisfaction with the communication (Patient Satisfaction Questionnaire), conversation appreciation and helpfulness, as well as decision-making satisfaction and confidence (visual analog scale, 0-100). In addition, patient and HCP characteristics associated with AP-perceived SDM support were examined.

RESULTS

APs (n = 131) did not significantly differentiate trained from untrained HCPs in their perceptions of SDM support nor in secondary outcomes. Agreement between APs' perceptions was poor. The higher the perceived comparability of the consultation with APs' previous personal experiences, the higher their rating of SDM support.

LIMITATIONS

We used a nonvalidated primary outcome and an innovative study design that should be tested in future work.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite the limitations of the study design, the training seemed to not affect cancer patients' and survivors' perceived SDM support.

IMPLICATIONS

The clinical relevance of the training on SDM support needs to be established. The variation in APs' assessments suggests patients differ in their perception of SDM support, stressing the importance of patient-tailored SDM support.

HIGHLIGHTS

Cancer patients and survivors did not significantly differentiate trained from untrained HCPs when evaluating SDM support, and agreement between their perceptions was poor.The clinical relevance of training GPs and nurses in SDM support needs to be established.Patient-tailored SDM support may be recommended, given the variation in APs' assessments and their possible diverging perceptions of SDM support.This innovative study design (having patients watch and assess videos of simulated consultations made in the context of training evaluation) needs to be further developed.

Do all prostate cancer patients want, and experience shared decision making prior to curative treatment?

OBJECTIVE

In comparable men with non-metastatic prostate cancer, radical prostatectomy (RP), radiotherapy (RAD) and active surveillance (AS) are treatment options with similar survival rates, but different side-effects. Healthcare professionals consider pretreatment shared decision making (SDM) to be an essential part of medical care, though the patients' view about SDM is less known. In this article, we explore prostate cancer (PCa) patients' SDM wish (SDMwish), and experiences (SDMexp).  Material and methods: This is a registry-based survey performed by the Cancer Registry of Norway (2017-2019). One year after diagnosis, 5,063 curatively treated PCa patients responded to questions about their pre-treatment wish and experience regarding SDM. Multivariable analyses identified factors associated with SDM. Statistical significance level: p < 0.05.  Results: Overall, 78% of the patients wished to be involved in SDM and 83% of these had experienced SDM. SDMwish and SDMexp was significantly associated with decreasing age, increasing education, and living with a partner. Compared with the RP group, the probability of SDMwish and SDMexp was reduced by about 40% in the RAD and the AS groups.  Conclusion: Three of four curatively treated PCa wanted to participate in SDM, and this wish was met in four of five men. Younger PCa patients with higher education in a relationship, and opting for RP, wanted an active role in SDM, and experienced being involved. Effective SDM requires the responsible physicians' attention to the individual patients' characteristics and needs.

Analysis of factors that promote the participation of patients with chronic diseases in shared decision making on medication: a cross-sectional survey in Hubei Province, China

BACKGROUND

Shared decision making (SDM) improves the health status of patients with chronic diseases, especially in the condition of poly-medicated patients. This study aims to find the factors associated with participation of patients with chronic diseases in SDM on medication.

METHODS

A total of 1,196 patients with chronic diseases were selected in Hubei Province of China using cluster sampling methods. The random forest method was applied to rank the importance of independent variables by Mean Decrease Gini and out-of- bag (OOB) curve. Multivariate logistic regression was used to explore the independent variables' effect direction and relative hazard.

RESULTS

In this study, 5.18% of patients used patient-directed decision making (PDM, a decision-making model led by patients), 37.79% of patients used SDM (a collaborative decision-making model by patients and doctors), and 57.02% of patients used doctor-directed decision making (DDM, or paternalistic decision making, a decision-making model led by doctors). The random forest analysis demonstrated that the top 5 important factors were age, education, exercise, disease course, and medication knowledge. The OOB curve showed that the error rate reached minimum when top 5 variables in importance ranking composed an optimal variable combination. In multivariate logistic regression, we chose SDM as a reference group, and identified medication knowledge (OR = 2.737, 95%CI = 1.524 ~ 4.916) as the influencing factor between PDM and SDM. Meanwhile, the influencing factors between DDM and SDM were age (OR = 0.636, 95%CI = 0.439 ~ 0.921), education (OR = 1.536, 95%CI = 1.122 ~ 2.103), exercise (OR = 1.443, 95%CI = 1.109 ~ 1.877), disease course (OR = 0.750, 95%CI = 0.584 ~ 0.964), and medication knowledge (OR = 1.446, 95%CI = 1.120 ~ 1.867).

CONCLUSION

Most Chinese patients with chronic diseases used DDM during their medication decision-making, and some patients used PDM and SDM. The participation in SDM should be taken seriously among elderly patients with lower education levels. The SDM promotion should focus on transformation of patients' traditional perception and enhance their medication knowledge.

Determinants of practice for providing decision coaching to facilitate informed values-based decision-making: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review

INTRODUCTION

Decision coaching is a non-directive approach to support patients to prepare for making health decisions. It is used to facilitate patients' involvement in informed values-based decision-making and use of evidence-based health information. A recent systematic review revealed low certainty evidence for its effectiveness with and without evidence-based information. However, there may be opportunities to improve the study and use of decision coaching in clinical practice by systematically investigating its determinants of practice. We aim to conduct a systematic review to identify and synthesise the determinants of practice for providing decision coaching to facilitate patient involvement in decision-making from multiple perspectives that influence its use.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will conduct a mixed-methods systematic review guided by the Cochrane' Handbook of Systematic Reviews. We will include studies reporting determinants of practice influencing decision coaching with or without evidence-based patient information with adults making a health decision for themselves or a family member. Systematic literature searches will be conducted in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and PsycINFO via Ovid and CINAHL via EBSCO including quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods study designs. Additionally, experts in the field will be contacted.Two reviewers will independently screen and extract data. We will synthesise determinants using deductive and inductive qualitative content analysis and a coding frame developed specifically for this review based on a taxonomy of barriers and enablers of shared decision-making mapped onto the major domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We will assess the quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethical approval is not required as this systematic review involves only previously published literature. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at scientific conferences and disseminated to relevant consumer groups.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42022338299.

Involvement in treatment decision-making and self-reported efficacy among patients with advanced colorectal cancer: a nationwide multi-center cross-sectional study

Introduction

This cross-sectional study evaluated the involvement of patients with advanced colorectal cancer (CRC) in treatment decision-making, assessed the treatment efficacy according to their self-reports, and investigated the influencing factors.

Methods

Patients with advanced CRC were recruited from 19 hospitals from March 2020 to March 2021 by a multi-stage multi-level sampling method. A self-designed questionnaire was used to collect demographic and clinical characteristics, involvement of CRC patients in treatment decision-making, treatment methods, and self-reported efficacy. Univariate and unordered multinomial logistic regression analyses were used to evaluate the factors affecting the involvement in treatment decision-making and self-reported efficacy.

Results

We enrolled 4533 patients with advanced CRC. The average age at diagnosis was 58.7 ± 11.8 years. For the treatment method, 32.4% of patients received surgery combined with chemotherapy, 13.1% of patients underwent surgery combined with chemotherapy and targeted therapy, and 9.7% of patients were treated with surgery alone. For treatment decision-making, 7.0% of patients were solely responsible for decision-making, 47.0% of patients shared treatment decision-making with family members, 19.0% of patients had family members solely responsible for treatment decision-making, and 27.0% of patients had their physicians solely responsible for treatment decision-making. Gender, age, education level, family income, marital status, treatment cost, hospital type, and treatment method were significantly associated with the involvement of patients in treatment decision-making. A total of 3824 patients submitted self-reported efficacy evaluations during treatment. The percentage of patients with good self-reported efficacy was 76.5% (for patients treated for the first time), 61.7% (for patients treated for the second time), and 43.2% (for patients treated after recurrence and metastasis), respectively. Occupation, education level, average annual family income, place of residence, time since cancer diagnosis, hospital type, clinical stage, targeted therapy, and involvement in treatment decision-making were the main influencing factors of self-reported efficacy of treatment.

Discussion

Conclusively, CRC patients are not highly dominant in treatment decision-making and more likely to make treatment decisions with their family and doctors. Timely and effective communication between doctors and patients can bolster patient involvement in treatment decision-making.

Shared decision-making in physiotherapy: a cross-sectional study of patient involvement factors and issues in Japan

BACKGROUND

Evidence-based medicine education has not focused on how clinicians involve patients in decision-making. Although shared decision-making (SDM) has been investigated to address this issue, there are insufficient data on SDM in physiotherapy. This study aimed to clarify the issues concerning patient involvement in Japan, and to examine whether SDM is related to perceptions of patient involvement in decision-making.

METHODS

The study participants were recruited from among acute and sub-acute inpatients and community residents receiving physiotherapy outpatient care, day care, and/or home rehabilitation. The Control Preference Scale (CPS) was used to measure the patients' involvement in decision-making. The nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) was used to measure SDM. In analysis I, we calculated the weighted kappa coefficient to examine the congruence in the CPS between the patients' actual and preferred roles. In analysis II, we conducted a logistic regression analysis using two models to examine the factors of patient involvement.

RESULTS

Analysis I included 277 patients. The patients' actual roles were as follows: most active (4.0%), active (10.8%), collaborative (24.6%), passive (35.0%), and most passive (25.6%). Their preferred roles were: most active (3.3%), active (18.4%), collaborative (39.4%), passive (24.5%), and most passive (14.4%). The congruence between actual and preferred roles by the kappa coefficient was 0.38. Analysis II included 218 patients. The factors for patient involvement were the clinical environment, the patient's preferred role, and the SDM-Q-9 score.

CONCLUSIONS

The patients in Japan indicated a low level of decision-making involvement in physiotherapy. The patients wanted more active involvement than that required in the actual decision-making methods. The physiotherapist's practice of SDM was revealed as one of the factors related to perceptions of patient involvement in decision-making. Our results demonstrated the importance of using SDM for patient involvement in physiotherapy.

Getting specific: participation preference in urooncological decision-making

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making is the gold standard for good clinical practice, and thus, psychometric instruments have been established to assess patients' generic preference for participation (e.g., the Autonomy Preference Index, API). However, patients' preferences may vary depending on the specific disease and with respect to the specific decision context. With a modified preference index (API-Uro), we assessed patients' specific participation preference in preference-sensitive decisions pertaining to urological cancer treatments and compared this with their generic participation preference.

METHODS

In Study 1, we recruited (N = 469) urological outpatients (43.1% urooncological) at a large university hospital. Participation preference was assessed with generic measures (API and API case vignettes) and with the disease-specific API-Uro (urooncological case vignettes describing medical decisions of variable difficulty). A polychoric exploratory factor analysis was used to establish factorial validity and reduce items. In Study 2, we collected data from N = 204 bladder cancer patients in a multicenter study to validate the factorial structure with confirmatory factor analysis. Differences between the participation preference for different decision contexts were analyzed.

RESULTS

Study 1: Scores on the specific urooncological case vignettes (API-Uro) correlated with the generic measure (r = .44) but also provided incremental information. Among the disease-specific vignettes of the API-Uro, there were two factors with good internal consistency (α ≥ .8): treatment versus diagnostic decisions. Patients desired more participation for treatment decisions (77.8%) than for diagnostic decisions (22%), χ²(1) = 245.1, p ≤ .001. Study 2: Replicated the correlation of the API-Uro with the API (r = .39) and its factorial structure (SRMR = .08; CFI = .974). Bladder cancer patients also desired more participation for treatment decisions (57.4%) than for diagnostic decisions (13.3%), χ²(1) =84, p ≤ .001.

CONCLUSIONS

The desire to participate varies between treatment versus diagnostic decisions among urological patients. This underscores the importance of assessing participation preference for specific contexts. Overall, the new API-Uro has good psychometric properties and is well suited to assess patients' preferences. In routine care, measures of participation preference for specific decision contexts may provide incremental, allowing clinicians to better address their patients' individual needs.

Status quo of advanced cancer patients participating in shared decision-making in China: a mixed study

PURPOSE

Patients with advanced cancer are usually willing to participate in shared decision-making (SDM), but in clinical practice, patient participation is easily ignored. This study aimed to analyze the current SDM status of advanced cancer patients and related factors.

METHODS

In quantitative research, we administered a cross-sectional survey to 513 advanced cancer patients in 16 tertiary hospitals in China. A sociodemographic information questionnaire, the Control Preference Scale (CPS), and Perceived-Involvement in Care Scale (PICS) were used to analyze current SDM status and influencing factors. Our qualitative research was based on the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF), and 17 advanced cancer patients were interviewed to explore their perceptions of SDM.

RESULTS

Our quantitative results show that patients' actual and expected decision-making participation differed; statistically significant influencing factors were age, insurance, and whether patients were worried about the therapeutic effects. We also found that dynamic decision-making mode changes, disease information acquisition, decision-making participation obstacles, and family members' roles affected patients' SDM through qualitative interviews.

CONCLUSION

Advanced cancer patients' SDM in China is dominated by sharing and continuously fluctuates. Influenced by Chinese traditional culture, family members play an important role in SDM. In clinical work, we should pay attention to the dynamic changes in patients' participation in decision-making and the role of family members.

Is shared decision-making a determinant of polypharmacy in older patients with chronic disease? A cross-sectional study in Hubei Province, China

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making(SDM) is recognized as an important means of managing polypharmacy among older people with chronic diseases. However, no studies have quantitatively measured the effect of SDM on polypharmacy. The objective of this study was to compare the impact of SDM and other factors on polypharmacy in inpatients and community patients. Additionally, the study aimed to compare the impact of different decision types on polypharmacy in community patients.

METHODS

This is a population-based multicenter retrospective study conducted in Hubei Province, China. A cluster sampling approach was used to recruit 536 chronic disease inpatients from March to April 2019, and 849 community patients were recruited from April to June 2021. Propensity score weighting was used to control the confounding variables and determine the net effect of SDM on polypharmacy.

RESULTS

Among the 536 hospitalized patients, the prevalence of polypharmacy was 56.3%. A high level of SDM was significantly associated with a lower risk of polypharmacy. Patients with chronic illnesses aged 76 years and older and with an annual family income of 24,001-36,000 yuan were associated with a lower likelihood of polypharmacy (p < 0.05). Multimorbidity was often accompanied by the occurrence of multiple medication use. Among 849 community patients, the prevalence of polypharmacy was 21.8%. Among types of decision-making, informed and paternalistic decision-making showed a higher likelihood of polypharmacy compared with shared decision-making (P < 0.05). Male, older patients over 76 years of age, urban residents, annual household income of 12,001-24,000 yuan, and multimorbidity were associated with higher likelihood of polypharmacy (P < 0.05). Patients with an annual household income of 24,001-36,000 yuan, 36,001 yuan or more, and good medication compliance showed a lower likelihood of polypharmacy (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

The prevalence of polypharmacy is high among China's older population with chronic disease who should be paid more atthention by the healthcare providers. Additionaly, encouraging the patients' attendance in SDM, reducing paternalistic and informed decision-making during prescribing, improving patient medication compliance, and increasing the promotion and guidance of rational medication use for patients are essential to reduce polypharmacy in Chinese chronic disease patients.

Documenting care together with patients: the experiences of nurses and patients

BACKGROUND

One way in which patients can participate in care is by taking part in medical documentation. Producing documentation together with patients has been found to decrease the amount of incorrect information, help patients to be involved, and promote shared decision-making. The aims of this study were to develop and implement a practice of producing documentation together with patients and to examine staff and patient experiences of this practice.

METHODS

A quality improvement study was conducted from 2019 to 2021 at a Day Surgery Unit in a Danish University Hospital. Before implementing a practice of documenting together with patients, nurses' perceptions of doing documentation together with patients were examined via a questionnaire survey. After an implementation period, a similar follow-up survey with staff was conducted, together with structured patient phone interviews.

RESULTS

A total of 24 nursing staff out of 28 (86%) filled in the questionnaire at baseline and 22 out of 26 (85%) at follow-up. A total of 61 out of 74 invited patients (82%) were interviewed. At baseline, the majority (71-96%) of participants agreed that documentation done together with the patient would contribute to increased patient safety, fewer errors, real-time documentation, patient involvement, visible patient perspective, correction of errors, more accessible information and less duplication of work. At follow-up, significant decreases in the staffs' positive perceptions of the benefits of documenting together with patients were found for all areas except for "real-time documentation" and "less duplication of work". Almost all patients found it okay that the nurses wrote up medical documentation during the interview, and more than 90% of patients found the staff responsive or very responsive and present during the reception interview.

CONCLUSION

Before implementation of a practice of documenting together with patients, the majority of staff assessed such documentation as being beneficial, but a significant decrease in positive assessment was found at follow-up, with challenges such as feeling less connected with the patient and practical, IT-related issues being described. The patients found the staff to be present and responsive and felt that it was important to know what was being written in their medical record.

Blended online learning for oncologists to improve skills in shared decision making about palliative chemotherapy: a pre-posttest evaluation

PURPOSE

To improve shared decision making (SDM) with advanced cancer patients, communication skills training for oncologists is needed. The purpose was to examine the effects of a blended online learning (i.e. e-learning and online training session) for oncologists about SDM in palliative oncological care and to compare this blended format with a more extensive, fully in-person face-to-face training format.

METHODS

A one-group pre-posttest design was adopted. Before (T0) and after (T2) training, participants conducted simulated consultations (SPAs) and surveys; after the e-learning (T1), an additional survey was filled out. The primary outcome was observed SDM (OPTION12 and 4SDM). Secondary outcomes included observed SDM per stage, SPA duration and decision made as well as oncologists' self-reported knowledge, clinical behavioural intentions, satisfaction with the communication and evaluation of the training. Additionally, outcomes of the blended learning were compared with those of the face-to-face training cohort. Analyses were conducted in SPSS by linear mixed models.

RESULTS

Oncologists (n = 17) showed significantly higher SDM scores after the blended online learning. The individual stages of SDM and the number of times the decision was postponed as well as oncologists' beliefs about capabilities, knowledge and satisfaction increased after the blended learning. Consultation duration was unchanged. The training was evaluated as satisfactory. When compared with the face-to-face training, the blended learning effects were smaller.

CONCLUSION

Blended online SDM training for oncologists was effective. However, the effects were smaller compared to face-to-face training. The availability of different training formats provides opportunities for tailoring training to the wishes and needs of learners.

Frequency and Influencing Factors of Shared Decision Making Among Breast Cancer Patients Receiving Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Due to the diversified and high sensitivity of breast cancer surgical treatment, various decision making styles show different functions in making trade-offs and sharing information. Shared decision making is the best practice paradigm to promote health outcomes. This study aimed to determine the overall frequency of shared decision making and explore influencing factors during the surgical decision-making process from breast cancer patients' perspectives. We searched 8 databases for studies about breast cancer patients' surgical decisional control preferences and shared decision making preference. Two researchers screened the literature, extracted the data, and evaluated the literature quality. Meta-analysis of the frequency of preferred and actual shared decision making and decision congruence was performed. Due to the limited studies of influencing factors, descriptive analysis was used. Fourteen original studies were included in this study. We found the overall pooled frequency of the preferred shared decision making of 48.1% (95%CI 33.5%, 62.6%) and the actual shared decision making of 38.1% (95%CI 33.9%, 42.2%). Moreover, the pooled frequency of the decision congruence between preferred and actual decision styles was 61.7% (95%CI 54.6%, 68.8%). The descriptive analysis findings indicated that the influencing factors of shared decision making included individual factors, surgeon-patient communication factors, and health setting factors. There was a gap between the preferred and actual decision styles in the surgical context. Therefore, health care providers should identify potential shared decision making barriers and facilitators, and advocate the clinical shared decision making model to embed shared decision making into routine practice.

Decisional Regret Among Patients Undergoing Colectomy

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing colectomy may be at risk for postoperative regret, which is associated with worse quality of life, higher rates of depression, and poorer health outcomes. A better understanding of factors associated with decisional regret may allow surgeons to better tailor preoperative discussions to mitigate the risk of regret.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to identify factors associated with regret in patients undergoing elective and urgent/emergent colectomy.

DESIGN

A retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, a 73-hospital collaborative, which collects clinical data on general surgery operations.

PATIENTS

Patients aged >18 years who underwent elective or urgent/emergent colectomy between January 2017 and March 2020 and who completed a decision regret survey.

MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES

Any degree of postoperative regret.

RESULTS

Of 3638 patients, 2,530 (70%) underwent elective and 1108 (30%) underwent urgent/emergent colectomy. Overall, 381 (10.5%) patients reported regret, with higher rates among the urgent/emergent setting compared with the elective cohort (13.0% vs 9.4%; p < 0.001). In the elective cohort, regret was associated with length of stay >7 days (OR, 2.32; 95% CI, 1.06-5.07), postoperative complication (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.36-2.79), and readmission (OR, 1.90; 95% CI, 1.22-2.95). Elective colectomies for cancer/adenoma/polyp were associated with lower odds of regret (OR, 0.68; 95% CI, 0.50-0.91). In the urgent/emergent cohort, regret was associated with female sex (OR, 1.69; 95% CI, 1.15-2.50) and nonhome discharge destination (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 0.04-1.03).

LIMITATIONS

Hospitals used different sampling strategies, limiting our ability to calculate a true response rate and characterize nonresponders.

CONCLUSIONS

One in 10 patients reported regret after colectomy with higher rates in those undergoing urgent/emergent colectomy. Factors associated with regret were different between surgical settings. Efforts are needed to mitigate patients' risk of regret with individualized discussions contingent on surgical settings to better align expectations and outcomes. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/C3 .

ARREPENTIMIENTO DEL PACIENTE EN LA DECISIN DE SOMETIMIENTO A COLECTOMA

ANTECEDENTES:Los pacientes que se someten a una colectomía pueden estar en riesgo de arrepentimiento post operatorio, la cual está asociada con una peor calidad de vida, mayores tasas de depresión y peores resultados de salud. Una mejor comprensión de los factores asociados con el arrepentimiento de dicha decisión, puede permitir a los cirujanos adaptar de una mejor manera las discusiones preoperatorias y así mitigar el riesgo de arrepentimiento.OBJETIVO:Identificar factores asociados al arrepentimiento en pacientes sometidos a colectomía electiva y urgente/emergente.DISEÑO:Estudio de cohorte retrospectivo.ESCENARIO:The Michigan Surgical Quality Collaborative, una colaboración de 73 hospitales.PACIENTES:Pacientes ≥18 años sometidos a colectomía electiva o urgente/emergente entre enero de 2017 y marzo de 2020, y que hayan completado una encuesta de arrepentimiento en cuanto a la decisión.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Reporte de cualquier grado de arrepentimiento postoperatorio.RESULTADOS:De 3.638 pacientes, 2.530 (70%) fueron sometidos a colectomía electiva y 1.108 (30%) a colectomía urgente/emergente. En general, 381 (10,5%) pacientes informaron arrepentimiento, con tasas más altas en el grupo relacionado con el escenario urgente/emergente en comparación con la cohorte electiva (13,0% frente a 9,4%, p < 0,001). En la cohorte electiva, el arrepentimiento se asoció con una estancia hospitalaria >7 días (OR 2,32, IC 95% 1,06-5,07), complicación posoperatoria (OR 1,95, IC 95% 1,36-2,79) y reingreso (OR 1,90, IC 95% 1,22-2,95). Las colectomías electivas por cáncer/adenoma/pólipo se asociaron con una menor probabilidad de arrepentimiento (OR 0,68, IC 95%: 0,50-0,91). En la cohorte urgente/emergente, el arrepentimiento se asoció con el sexo femenino (OR 1,69, IC 95% 1,15-2,50) y el destino del alta no domiciliario (OR 1,61, IC 95% 0,04-1,03).LIMITACIONES:Los hospitales utilizaron diferentes estrategias de muestreo, lo que limita nuestra capacidad para calcular una tasa de respuesta real y caracterizar a los que no respondieron.CONCLUSIONES:Uno de cada diez pacientes reportó arrepentimiento después de la colectomía con tasas más altas en aquellos sometidos a colectomía urgente/emergente. Los factores asociados con el arrepentimiento fueron diferentes entre los entornos quirúrgicos. Se necesitan esfuerzos para mitigar el riesgo de arrepentimiento de los pacientes con discusiones individualizadas supeditadas al entorno quirúrgico para caracterizar de una mejor las expectativas y los resultados. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/C3 . (Traducción-Dr. Osvaldo Gauto).

Pilot trial of iBDecide: Evaluating an online tool to facilitate shared decision making for adolescents and young adults with ulcerative colitis

INTRODUCTION

This pilot, randomized controlled trial aimed to evaluate the usability, among adolescents and young adults (AYAs) with ulcerative colitis (UC), of a web-based tool ('iBDecide') designed to facilitate shared decision making (SDM).

METHODS

AYAs with UC (n = 35) were randomized to intervention (iBDecide, n = 14) and control (n = 12) arms before a scheduled clinic visit. We measured the usability of iBDecide, SDM, preferred decision-making style, decision conflict and intervention use.

RESULTS

Participants in the intervention group found iBDecide easy to use and agreed that it made them feel ready to participate in decision making and that they would use it to prepare for appointments. There were 130 visits to iBDecide, lasting on average 3 min, 41 s. The medication and nutrition trackers were among the most-viewed pages. Pages specifically designed to facilitate SDM were viewed only four times. Across groups, too few participants reported making decisions during clinic visits for decision-related measures to be reported.

CONCLUSIONS

This pilot trial provides evidence for the usability of iBDecide and guidance for developing a larger-scale trial of a combined web-based and in-clinic SDM intervention. Overall, iBDecide shows promise in engaging AYAs with UC in SDM and condition management.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients, specifically AYAs with UC, and healthcare providers were involved in the design of this study's intervention, iBDecide. Additionally, the research team, from study conception to manuscript writing, included a young adult with inflammatory bowel disease.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov (NCT04207008).

Validation of the Therapeutic Self-Care Scale-European Portuguese Version in Primary Care Type 2 Diabetes Adults

Self-care is an important nursing-sensitive outcome. Reliable and valid measures are needed for therapeutic self-care assessment that may inform the development and evaluation of individualized nursing interventions co-created with type 2 diabetes mellitus (T2DM) adults. The therapeutic self-care scale European Portuguese version (TSCS-EPV) is a validated generic measure that may be used to assess self-care in T2DM adults. Aim: To examine the psychometric properties of the TSCS-EP version in T2DM adults, in primary health care. Methods: A cross-sectional pilot study in a convenience sample of 80 adults with T2DM from two primary health care centers in Portugal was conducted. Individuals completed the Portuguese version of the TSC scale. Results: A three-factor solution emerged from the principal component analysis: “Recognizing and managing signs and symptoms”; “Managing changes in health condition” and “Managing medication”, explaining 75% of the total variance. Total scale Cronbach’s alpha was 0.884 and for the three factors ranged from 0.808 to 0.954. Conclusion: the therapeutic self-care scale European Portuguese version is a promising scale for assessing therapeutic self-care abilities in adults with T2DM in primary care settings. More consistent results on its validity and reliability are needed for it to be used in the country.

The Tell me tool: The development and feasibility of a tool for person-centred infertility care

Background

An important—and often missing—element of person‐centred care is the inclusion of individual patients' values and preferences. This is challenging but especially important for high‐burden fertility treatments. We describe the development of a clinical tool that aims to facilitate the delivery of person‐centred fertility care by giving insight into the patients' values and preferences.

Methods

We developed the Tell me tool following the three principles of user‐centred design: (1) early and continual focus on users; (2) iterative design; (3) measurement of user behaviour. Accordingly, our methods consisted of three phases: (1) conducting semi‐structured interviews with 18 couples undergoing fertility treatment, followed by a consensus meeting with relevant stakeholders; (2) performing seven iterative improvement rounds; (3) testing the feasibility of the tool in 10 couples.

Results

The Tell me tool consists of a ranking assignment of 13 themes and two open‐ended questions. These themes relate to the couples' wellbeing and experience of the treatment, such as mental health and shared decision making. The open‐ended questions ask them to write down what matters most to them. The field test showed variation between the individual patients' answers. The tool proved to highlight what is important to the individual patient and gives insight into patients' personal contexts.

Conclusions

We developed a tool that gives insight into the values and preferences of the individual patient. The tool seems feasible for facilitating person‐centred fertility care.

Patient or Public Contribution

The tool was developed with a user‐centred design that strongly involved patients.

Influence of a Preadmission Procedure-Specific Consent Document on Patient Recall of Informed Consent at 4 Weeks After Total Hip Replacement: A Randomized Controlled Trial

OBJECTIVES

Consent is a legal and ethical requirement for undertaking surgical procedures; however, the literature suggests that there continues to be poor recall among patients of the surgical risks discussed during the consent process. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the addition of a preadmission procedure-specific consent document would improve patient recall of surgical risks at 4 weeks after total hip replacement in patients consented with a procedure-specific consent form.

METHODS

A prospective randomized controlled trial allocated seventy adult patients who were undergoing a primary total hip replacement to either receive (intervention group) or not receive (control group) a preadmission procedure-specific consent document. All patients were also consented with a procedure-specific consent form on the morning of surgery and were contacted 4 weeks later to assess recall of surgical risks.

RESULTS

There was a very poor recall rate seen in both the intervention group (16%) and the control group (13%), with no statistically significant difference between them (P = 0.49). A large number (30%) of patients could not recall a single risk. A subgroup analysis excluding these "consent nonresponders" did show a significantly increased recall rate in the intervention group (24.5% versus 18.25%, P = 0.02).

CONCLUSIONS

Patient recall of potential complications of total hip replacement was poor despite the intervention. Although not effective overall, the use of a preadmission procedure-specific consent document did improve recall of potential complications of surgery in a subset of patients. The phenomenon of consent nonresponders is worth exploring in future research.

This should help with that: A behavioral investigation into self-derivation of knowledge about prescription medications

Self-derivation of new factual knowledge is crucial for building a knowledge base. In three experiments, we investigated self-derivation about prescription medications. In Experiment 1, adults self-derived new knowledge across textual materials on 40% of trials. Participants in Experiment 2 performed similarly (42%), even when half the information was presented in videos. It was crucial that participants received both learning episodes to successfully self-derive: control condition participants received half the necessary information and performed significantly lower. When a delay was imposed between related facts in Experiment 3, participants self-derived on only 33% of trials and performance did not differ from the control condition. The present research expanded our understanding of adults' learning and self-derivation across media about medications. It revealed room for improvement in adults' learning and self-derivation about health information. This work suggests the need to identify factors that alter performance, including better understanding of the properties of information sources.

Engaging patients in population-based chronic disease management: A qualitative study of barriers and intervention opportunities

OBJECTIVE

Cardiovascular disease (CVD) continues to be a leading cause of morbidity in the U.S. Managing CVD risk factors, such as diabetes or hypertension, can be challenging for many individuals. We investigated the barriers experienced by patients who persistently struggled to reach their CVD risk factor control goals.

METHODS

This qualitative study examined patient, clinician, and researcher observations of individuals' experiences in a chronic disease management program. All participants (n = 332) were enrolled in a clinical trial testing a skills-based group intervention seeking to improve healthcare engagement. Data were analyzed through a general inductive approach and resulting themes were structured along the Capability-Opportunity-Motivation-Behavior framework.

RESULTS

Analyses identified care engagement barriers related to participants' communication skills and activation, care team relationship processes, and emotional factors. Although most participants reported benefitting from skills training, persistent barriers included distrust of their providers, shame about health challenges, and dissatisfaction with care team interactions that were described as impersonal or unresponsive.

CONCLUSIONS AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Efforts to support engagement in CVD risk factor management programs should address whether patients and their care team have the necessary skills, opportunities and confidence to proactively communicate health needs and engage in non-judgmental interactions for goal-setting, rapport-building, and shared decision-making.

The relationships of health literacy, preferred involvement, and patient activation with perceived involvement in care among Mongolian patients with breast and cervical cancer

OBJECTIVE

To explore the relationships of health literacy, preferred involvement, and patient activation with perceived involvement in care among patients with breast and cervical cancer.

METHODS

A cross-sectional survey was conducted with patients aged 20 years or older, aware of their cancer diagnosis, and currently receiving care at the National Cancer Center, Mongolia. Descriptive statistics and multivariate regression analysis were used to identify the relationships among study variables.

RESULTS

Two hundred twenty-five patients were included in the final analysis. Patients' perceived involvement was examined as two subdomains: patient information seeking (PIS) and patient decision-making (PDM). Patient health literacy was found to only significantly influence PIS, and patient preferred involvement demonstrated a significant influence only on PDM. However, patient activation predictor was found to significantly influence both PIS and PDM (PIS [β = 0.22, p = 0.00] and PDM [β = 0.14, p = 0.00]).

CONCLUSION

Health literacy, preferred involvement, and patient activation each demonstrated distinct influences on patients' perceived involvement subdomains, with patient activation being the most important predictor.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Comprehensive strategies at the healthcare organization, professional, and patient levels may help to facilitate and advance patient involvement in care, and ultimately improve the quality of healthcare services respective to domain of patient-centeredness.

Cancer Survivors: What Are Their Information Seeking Behaviours?

This study aims to examine the information seeking behaviours and experiences of cancer survivors at various stages of the cancer survivorship trajectory in Singapore. Data was collected via a self-administered questionnaire from survivors diagnosed with the top 6 cancers in Singapore seen at the National Cancer Centre Singapore (NCCS). Cancer survivorship stages were categorized as newly diagnosed and on treatment (NT), completed treatment or cancer-free ≥ 5 years (CT) and had recurrence or second cancer (RS). Out of the 998 cancer survivors, 676 (68%) had searched for cancer information since their diagnosis. About 57% of the searchers did their most recent search in the past 6 months prior to the survey, with most of these survivors from the NT and RS groups. Around half of the searchers (55%) obtained cancer information from the internet. The most preferred source for cancer information was the internet (38%), followed by healthcare professionals (HCPs) (23%). About half (49%) obtained cancer information from their preferred source. Some information searchers (24%) did not do so, out of which about half used the internet to obtain information that they would have preferred to obtain from HCPs. The top 3 most commonly sought information was related to treatment, cancer and diet/nutrition. Half of the searchers were concerned with the quality of the information that they found. These information seeking behaviours and experiences were similar across cancer survivorship stages. Our study reveals that information seeking is prevalent across all survivorship stages. Patterns of information-seeking revealed a discrepancy between preferred and actual source.

Physician empathy and patient enablement: survey in the Portuguese primary health care

BACKGROUND

Empathy is the capacity to understand and resonate with the experiences of other people. Patient enablement is the degree to which a patient feels strengthened in terms of being able to deal with, understand and manage their disease.

METHODS

Secondary cross-sectional analysis of existing data from 2 independent datasets (456 primary health care patients), with the application of two validated questionnaires, Jefferson Scale of Patient Perceptions of Physician Empathy (JSPPPE) and Patient Enablement Instrument (PEI).

OBJECTIVE

Evaluate medical empathy and patients' enablement after consultation with their family doctors and to verify if there was an association between these two concepts.

RESULTS

The median value of JSPPPE-VP score was 6.60 (interquartile range 1.00) and of PEI/ICC score was of 1.83 (interquartile range 0.67). Regarding empathy (JSPPPE-VP), patients taking chronic medication had a slight but significantly higher median score than patients not taking them (6.70 versus 6.60, P = 0.049), although regression modelling did not confirm any relevant predictor of JSPPPE-VP score. Regarding enablement (PEI/ICC), we found significantly higher scores on younger patients, as well as, on more educated and professionally active ones (P < 0.001). Multivariable linear regression and Poisson regression modelling confirmed such variables as statistically significant potential predictors.

CONCLUSIONS

A significant positive association was found between empathy score (JSPPPE-VP) and enablement score (PEI/ICC), when adjusted to sociodemographic cofactors. On this linear regression model, age category and educational level were also significantly associated with empathy score, with the same pattern found on bivariate analysis.

Participation preferences of health service users in health care decision-making regarding rehabilitative care in Germany-A cross-sectional study

BACKGROUND

Involving patients and citizens in health care decision-making is considered increasingly important in Germany. Participatory structures have been implemented, especially in rehabilitative care. However, it is unknown whether and to what extent German patients and citizens want to participate in decisions that exceed their own medical treatment.

OBJECTIVE

This study aimed to survey participation preferences and associated factors of health service users in decisions regarding rehabilitative care at micro, meso and macro levels.

METHODS

A questionnaire was sent to 3872 former rehabilitants. We collected participation preferences using the Control Preference Scale or an adapted form. Possible influencing factors were examined using logistic regression models.

RESULTS

The response rate was 5.7% (n = 217). At all decision-making levels, joint decision-making was preferred. At the macro level, preferences for actively participating were the highest. Preferences were significantly interrelated between decision-making levels. At the micro level, an orthopaedic indication significantly decreased the desire for participation compared to psychosomatic indications (odds ratio = 0.44, p = .019).

DISCUSSION

Participants wanted to be equally involved in decision-making as experts. Higher preferences for active participation at the macro level might be due to dissatisfaction with the current health care organisation and lack of trust in politicians. Compared to the general public, our study sample was older (73.3% between 50 and 69 years) and more often chronically ill-factors associated with increased participation preferences in the literature.

CONCLUSION

Contrary to the identified preferences, participation opportunities in the German health care system are rare. Further research on participation preferences and structures that enable meaningful involvement are needed.

Relationship between trust and patient involvement in medical decision-making: A cross-sectional study

Introduction

Patients vary in their preferences regarding involvement in medical decision-making. Current research does not provide complete explanation for this observed variation. Patient involvement in medical decision-making has been found to be influenced by various mechanisms, one of which could be patients’ trust in physicians. The aim of this study was to examine whether trust in physicians fosters or impairs patient involvement in medical decision-making. This study also aimed to determine to what extent the relationship between trust and preferences regarding decision-making roles was influenced by the sociodemographic characteristics of the patients. We hypothesised that trust can both foster and impair patient involvement in medical decision-making.

Materials and methods

A survey was sent out to members of the Nivel Dutch Health Care Consumer Panel in February 2016 (response rate = 47%, N = 703). The Wake Forest Physician Trust Scale was used to measure trust. Patient involvement was measured using two items based on the study published by Flynn and colleagues in 2006. Multiple regression analysis was used to analyse the relationship between trust and patient involvement.

Results

We found a negative relationship between trust and patient involvement in medical decision-making in men. Women with high trust reported to be more involved in medical decision-making compared to men with high trust.

Conclusion

The results suggest that trust impairs involvement in medical decision-making for men but not for women. Further research could provide a more comprehensive explanation of the variation in patient preferences regarding involvement in medical decision-making to further elucidate which underlying mechanisms could enhance patient participation.

Shared Decision-Making and Role Preference Among Patients With Schizophrenia in Malaysia: A Cross-Sectional Study

Introduction: Shared decision-making (SDM) is recognized as a promising strategy for improving collaboration between clinicians and their patients in achieving recovery. In Malaysia, SDM among people with schizophrenia is still lacking both in practice and in research. This study aimed to determine the level of SDM and role preference and their associated factors among patients with schizophrenia in Malaysia. Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on 86 outpatient attendees with schizophrenia at a teaching hospital in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia. The nine-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire and Control Preference Scale were used to assess perceived SDM experience and role preference, respectively. Linear and logistic regression models were used to analyze the factors associated with SDM and role preference, respectively. Factors with a p <0.25 from the simple regression analyses were controlled as the covariates in the multiple regression analyses. Results: The study respondents were predominantly female, single, and unemployed, with a mean age of 44 years. Only 35% of the participants reported having high SDM experiences, even though the majority (56%) preferred autonomous role preference. Among the participants who preferred autonomous roles, only 40% experienced high SDM. High SDM was found to be significantly associated with being younger (B = -0.33, 95% CI = -0.67 to -0.003) and being non-clozapine users (B = 19.90, 95% CI = 9.39-30.41), while autonomous role preference was significantly associated with a lower level of insight [adjusted odds ratio (AOR) = 0.84, 95% CI = 0.72-0.99] and being on oral antipsychotic drugs only (AOR = 2.94, 95% CI = 1.10-7.82). Conclusion: The practice of SDM is still lacking in the treatment of patients with schizophrenia in Malaysia, even though many of them preferred to be involved in the decision-making pertaining to their treatment. This study indicates the need for clinicians to improve their patients' involvement in the treatment process. More research is needed on how SDM can be implemented in patients with schizophrenia, especially in Asian population settings.

Information, deliberation, and decisional control preferences for participation in medical decision-making and its influencing factors among Chinese cancer patients

Background

Patient‐centred care should strive to respond to the individual patient's needs and preferences when possible. Yet, preferences of cancer patients for participation in different stages of the medical decision‐making process to increase matching of preferred and actual participation of the patients in decision‐making are not well known.

Objective

This study aimed to determine the level of information, deliberation and decisional control preferences in decision‐making practices among Chinese cancer patients and to explore their association with the sociodemographic and clinical variables of the patients.

Methods

A cross‐sectional study was conducted involving a convenience sample of 328 cancer patients from three public hospitals in Guangzhou, China. The Patient Expectation for Participation in Medical Decision‐making Scale (PEPMDS) was used to evaluate information, deliberation and decisional control preferences of the patients. Binary logistic regressions were conducted to determine the association between sociodemographic variables, clinical variables and preferences of the patients.

Results

Most patients reported a high preference for information (73.2%) and deliberation (73.8%), while a small number (37.2%) reported a high preference for decisional control. Younger patients and patients with higher levels of education were significantly more likely to have a high preference for information, deliberation and decisional control. Patients with low annual family incomes were significantly more likely to have a low preference for decisional control.

Conclusion

Preferences of patients for involvement in different stages of decision‐making practices could vary. The level of preferences appears to be related to the patient's age, education level, and financial status.

Practice Implications

Healthcare providers should tailor the participatory approaches of patients considering individual preferences for information, deliberation and decisional control during medical decision‐making.

Patient Contribution

Patients participated in the survey and filled in the questionnaires.

Translation and psychometric evaluation of the German version of the IcanSDM measure - a cross-sectional study among healthcare professionals

Background

Shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) is a key component of patient-centred care. To implement SDM in clinical practice and to evaluate its effects, it is helpful to know about HCPs’ perception of SDM barriers. The measure IcanSDM was developed in Canada and assesses the perception of SDM barriers. To our knowledge, no equivalent measure exists in German. Therefore, the aim of this study was to translate and adapt the IcanSDM measure to be used by a German speaking population and evaluate its psychometric properties.

Methods

This is a cross-sectional psychometric study based on a secondary analysis of baseline data from a SDM implementation study. The original 8-item IcanSDM was translated into German using a team translation protocol. We assessed comprehensibility via cognitive interviews with n = 11 HCPs. Based on results of cognitive interviews, the translated IcanSDM version was revised. Two hundred forty-two HCPs filled out the measure. Psychometric analysis included acceptance (completion rate), item characteristics (response distribution, skewness, item difficulties, corrected item-total correlations, inter-item correlations), factorial structure (confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), model fit), and internal consistency (Cronbach’s α).

Results

We translated and adapted the German IcanSDM successfully except for item 8, which had to be revised after the cognitive interviews. Completion rate was 98%. Skewness of the items ranged between −.797 and 1.25, item difficulties ranged between 21.63 and 70.85, corrected item-total-correlations ranged between .200 and .475, inter-item correlations ranged between .005 and .412. Different models based on CFA results did not provide a valid factorial structure. Cronbach’s α ranged between .563 and .651 for different factor models.

Conclusion

We provide the first German measure for assessing perception of SDM barriers by HCPs. The German IcanSDM is a brief measure with good acceptance. However, we found unsatisfying psychometric properties, which were comparable to results of the original scale. In a next step, the IcanSDM should be further developed and modified and predictive validity should be evaluated.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12913-021-06430-3.

Assessing patient information and decision-support needs in problematic alcohol use and co-occurring depression to inform shared decision-making interventions

The authors assessed the informational and decision-support needs of patients, families, and clinicians when deciding on treatment for problematic alcohol use and depression. Patients (n = 56), family members (n = 16), and clinicians (n = 65) with experience deciding on treatment for problematic alcohol use and depression were eligible. Participants completed an online decisional needs assessment survey. Stakeholder groups identified numerous difficult patient-level treatment decisions and elevated decisional conflict. Participants preferred patient-led or shared treatment decision-making (75%-95.4%). Patients (32.6%) reported not being as involved in treatment decision-making as preferred, a higher proportion than reported by clinicians (16.4%; p = .056). More patients (19.6%) than clinicians (3.6%) reported clinician-led treatment decision-making, with little or no patient involvement (p = .022). Stakeholder preferences for future decision-support resources included online information for use outside consultations.

Correlates of preferring a passive role in decision-making among patients with schizophrenia or bipolar disorder

OBJECTIVE

To assess the factors associated with the persistence of clinician-led style in the therapeutic relationship in cases of serious mental illness, and the conditioning factors that the patients identify as determinants of their health.

METHOD

Assessment of preferences in the decision-making process and health-related control locus of 107 outpatients with DSM-5 diagnosis of schizophrenia or bipolar disorder. Demographic and clinical information was also obtained through review of available records and using several scales.

RESULTS

64.4 % patients preferred to adopt a passive role in the therapeutic relationship. In the multivariate analysis, the preference of playing a passive role in the decision-making process was significantly associated with the elderly, being disabled, or the view that one's health depends on doctors (AUC ROC value: 0.80).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with severe mental illness more frequently preferred a passive role in the decision-making process. We found several factors associated with a preference for the "expert role" model.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The identified factors may permit care to be tailored to the most probable expectations as regard decision-making. Since the populations concerned may be vulnerable and suffer inequalities in the provision of health services, promoting participation in the care process could help improve clinical parameters ethically.

Exploration of GP perspectives on deprescribing antidepressants: a qualitative study

OBJECTIVE

Our aim was to explore general practitioners' (GPs) perceptions and experiences of discontinuing antidepressants.

STUDY DESIGN

A qualitative study using semistructured interviews was undertaken between July 2019 and March 2020. The interviews were transcribed and analysed using a thematic analysis framework.

SETTING

GPs affiliated with a university education and research network for general practice in Ireland.

PARTICIPANTS

A purposive sample of GPs (n=10).

RESULTS

Five themes emerged: shared decision-making; personalised therapy; medication-tapering toolkit; health service factors and concerns around tapering. GPs described being less likely to engage in deprescribing for patients with long-term and/or recurrent depression, older patients and those with comorbidities due to fear of relapse. Access to evidence-based psychological therapies, guidelines, information on rates of relapse, patient leaflets on discontinuing antidepressants and reminder prompts on GP-prescribing software were suggested to optimise appropriate antidepressant discontinuation. There was some suggestion that patients may use antidepressants for longer when talk therapy is not available or taken up.

CONCLUSIONS

GPs are largely confident in their role of managing mild-to-moderate depression and deprescribing antidepressants. This study provides an insight into factors that influence GPs' decisions to deprescribe antidepressants. More information on rates of relapse after discontinuation would be helpful to inform decision-making.

Patients with Metastatic Lung Cancer and Oncologists' Views on Achievement of Treatment Goals and Making the Right Treatment Decision: A Prospective Multicenter Study

BACKGROUND

Previous studies have investigated patients' treatment goals before starting a treatment for metastatic lung cancer. Data on the evaluation of treatment goals are lacking.

AIM

To determine if patients with metastatic lung cancer and their oncologists perceive the treatment goals they defined at the start of systemic treatment as achieved after treatment and if in hindsight they believe it was the right decision to start systemic therapy.

DESIGN AND PARTICIPANTS

A prospective multicenter study in 6 hospitals across the Netherlands between 2016 and 2018. Following systemic treatment, 146 patients with metastatic lung cancer and 23 oncologists completed a questionnaire on the achievement of their treatment goals and whether they made the right treatment decision. Additional interviews with 15 patients and 5 oncologists were conducted.

RESULTS

According to patients and oncologists, treatment goals were achieved in 30% and 37% for 'quality of life,' 49% and 41% for 'life prolongation,' 26% and 44% for 'decrease in tumor size,' and 44% for 'cure', respectively. Most patients and oncologists, in hindsight, felt they had made the right decision to start treatment even if they had not achieved their goals (72% and 93%). This was related to the feeling that they had to do 'something.'

CONCLUSIONS

Before deciding on treatment, the treatment options, including their benefits and side effects, and the goals patients have should be discussed. It is key that these discussions include not only systemic treatment but also palliative care as effective options for doing 'something.'

Exploring patterns in psychiatric outpatients' preferences for involvement in decision-making: a latent class analysis approach

BACKGROUND

Shared decision-making (SDM), a collaborative approach that includes and respects patients' preferences for involvement in decision-making about their treatment, is increasingly advocated. However, in the practice of clinical psychiatry, implementing SDM seems difficult to accomplish. Although the number of studies related to psychiatric patients' preferences for involvement is increasing, studies have largely focused on understanding patients in public mental healthcare settings. Thus, investigating patient preferences for involvement in both public and private settings is of particular importance in psychiatric research. The objectives of this study were to identify different latent class typologies of patient preferences for involvement in the decision-making process, and to investigate how patient characteristics predict these typologies in mental healthcare settings.

METHODS

We conducted latent class analysis (LCA) to identify groups of psychiatric outpatients with similar preferences for involvement in decision-making to estimate the probability that each patient belonged to a certain class based on sociodemographic, clinical and health belief variables.

RESULTS

The LCA included 224 consecutive psychiatric outpatients' preferences for involvement in treatment decisions in public and private psychiatric settings. The LCA identified three distinct preference typologies, two collaborative and one passive, accounting for 78% of the variance. Class 1 (26%) included collaborative men aged 34-44 years with an average level of education who were treated by public services for a depressive disorder, had high psychological reactance, believed they controlled their disease and had a pharmacophobic attitude. Class 2 (29%) included collaborative women younger than 33 years with an average level of education, who were treated by public services for an anxiety disorder, had low psychological reactance or health control belief and had an unconcerned attitude toward medication. Class 3 (45%) included passive women older than 55 years with lower education levels who had a depressive disorder, had low psychological reactance, attributed the control of their disease to their psychiatrists and had a pharmacophilic attitude.

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings highlight how psychiatric patients vary in pattern of preferences for treatment involvement regarding demographic variables and health status, providing insight into understanding the pattern of preferences and comprising a significant advance in mental healthcare research.

Discordance Between Advanced Cancer Patients' Perceived and Preferred Roles in Decision Making and its Association with Psychological Distress and Perceived Quality of Care

OBJECTIVE

We investigated patient-reported roles of families, physicians, and patients themselves in treatment decision making and whether discordance between perceived and preferred roles is associated with psychological distress and perceived quality of care among patients with cancer.

METHODS

We analyzed cross-sectional survey data from 599 adults with stage IV solid malignancy in Singapore. Stuart-Maxwell tests were used to compare patients' perceived and preferred roles in decision making. Types of discordance were categorized as follows: involvement at a lesser level than preferred, involvement at a greater level than preferred, and no change in patient involvement. Ordinary least squares regressions examined the associations between types of discordance and patient outcomes, controlling for patient characteristics.

RESULTS

Discordance between perceived and preferred roles was observed in 16% of patients. Amongst patients with discordance, 33% reported being involved at a lesser level than they preferred, 47% reported being involved at a greater level than they preferred, and 19% reported discordance where level of patient involvement did not change. Multivariable analyses showed that lesser involvement than preferred and discordance with no change in patient involvement were associated with poorer quality of physician communication (β = - 9.478 [95% confidence interval {CI} - 16.303 to - 2.653] and β = - 9.184 [95% CI - 18.066 to - 0.301]) and poorer care coordination (β = - 11.658 [95% CI - 17.718 to - 5.597] and β = - 8.856 [95% CI - 16.744 to - 0.968]) compared with concordance.

CONCLUSIONS

Most patients reported participating at their desired level. Despite this finding, our results suggest that involving patients at a lesser level than they prefer can lead to poorer perceived quality of physician communication and care coordination and that encouraging patient participation is a safe approach to minimizing poor outcomes.

Exploring the experiences and perceptions of haemodialysis patients observing Ramadan fasting: a qualitative study

BACKGROUND

The festival of Ramadan is a month of spiritual reflection for Muslims worldwide. During Ramadan, Muslims are required to refrain from eating and drinking during daylight hours. Although exempted from fasting, many patients undergoing maintenance haemodialysis (HD) opt to participate in this religious practice. Many studies have explored the effects of Ramadan on health outcomes, however, the exploration from patients' own point of view pertaining to this religious practice is lacking. Thus, we aimed to explore the experiences and perceptions of Muslim HD patients observing Ramadan fasting from three HD centres in Klang Valley, Malaysia.

METHOD

An exploratory phenomenology qualitative study was conducted whereby subjects were purposively selected based on previous experience in observing Ramadan fasting. Face-to-face in-depth interviews were conducted, and study data were analyzed thematically and iteratively coded using a constant comparison method.

RESULTS

Four major themes emerged from the data, namely: (i) "fasting experiences", (ii) "perceived side effects of fasting", (iii) "health-seeking behavior" and, (iv) "education and awareness needs". Patients expressed the significance of Ramadan fasting as well as the perceived impact of fasting on their health. Additionally, there is lack of health-seeking behaviour observed among patients thus, raising needs for awareness and education related to Ramadan fasting.

CONCLUSIONS

Findings of this study shed light on patients' experiences and perceptions regarding Ramadan fasting which warrants the needs for an effective communication between patients and health care practitioners through a structured-Ramadan specific education program.

Factors Associated With Decision Regret Among Patients With Diverticulitis in the Elective Setting

BACKGROUND

We aimed to identify decision process measures associated with patient decisional regret regarding the decision to pursue elective colectomy or observation for diverticulitis.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This was a single-center cross-sectional survey study. We included adult patients treated for diverticulitis between 2014 and 2019 and excluded patients who required urgent or emergent colectomy. The primary outcome was regret regarding the decision to pursue elective surgery or observation for diverticulitis, measured using the Decision Regret Scale. We used multivariable linear regression to examine hypothesized predictors of decision regret, including decisional conflict (Decision Conflict Scale and its subscales), shared decision-making, and decision role concordance.

RESULTS

Of 923 eligible patients, 133 were included in the analysis. Patients had a median of five episodes of diverticulitis (interquartile range 3-8), occurring a median of 2 y (interquartile range 1-3) before survey administration. Thirty-eight patients (29%) underwent elective surgery for diverticulitis. Decision regret (Decision Regret Scale score ≥25) was present in 42 patients (32%). After controlling for surgery, gender, health status, and years since treatment, decision regret was associated with decisional conflict and inversely associated with values clarity, decision role concordance, shared decision-making, and feeling informed, supported, and effective in decision-making (all P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Nearly one-third of survey respondents experienced regret regarding the decision between elective surgery and observation for diverticulitis. Decision regret may be reduced through efforts to improve patient knowledge, values clarity, role concordance, and shared decision-making.

Effects of a time out consultation with the general practitioner on cancer treatment decision-making: a randomised controlled trial: Time out with the general practitioner and cancer treatment decision

Objective

Improving shared decision‐making (SDM) enables more tailored cancer treatment decisions. We evaluated a Time Out consultation (TOC) with the general practitioner (GP), between cancer diagnosis and treatment decision, which aims at supporting SDM and improving continuity of primary care. This study aims to evaluate the effects of a TOC on perceived SDM, information provision and self‐efficacy.

Methods

This randomised controlled trial included newly diagnosed patients with curable cancer (breast, lung, colorectal, gynaecologic and melanoma) from four Dutch hospitals. Primary outcome is perceived SDM and secondary outcomes are information provision and self‐efficacy.

Results

One hundred fifty‐four patients (control n = 77, intervention n = 77) – female: 75%, mean age: 61 (SD ± 11.9). In the intervention group, 80.5% (n = 62) had a TOC, of which 82.3% (n = 51) took place after treatment decision. Perceived SDM was lower in the intervention group (−8.9 [95% CI: 0.6–17.1]). Among those with a TOC before treatment decision (n = 11), perceived SDM was comparable to the control group (66.5 ± 27.2 vs. 67.9 ± 26.1).

Conclusion

Even though patients are motivated to have a TOC, implementing a TOC between diagnosis and treatment decision is challenging. Effects of a timely TOC could not be established. Non‐timely TOC decreased perceived SDM. Planning of the TOC should be optimised, and future research should establish if adequately timed TOC results in improved SDM in cancer patients.

Patient and proxy reports regarding the experience of treatment decision-making in cancer care

OBJECTIVE

Shared decision-making, including the elicitation of patient preferences regarding treatment decisions, is considered part of high-quality cancer care. However, patients may not be able to self-report due to illness, and therefore proxy reports may be used. We sought to determine the difference between proxy and patient reports about patient decisions and preferences among patients who received or were scheduled for chemotherapy using data from a large, population-based survey of patients with incident lung or colorectal cancer.

METHODS

Of 3573 patients who received or were scheduled for chemotherapy, 3108 self-reported and 465 had proxies reporting on their behalf about preferred and actual decision roles regarding this treatment. Preferred and actual decision roles were assessed using the Control Preferences Scale, and categorized as shared, patient-controlled, or doctor-controlled. Multivariable logistic regression models were used to assess the association between patient and proxy responses and whether preferences were met. The models adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables and patient/proxy-reported health status.

RESULTS

Sixty-three percent of all respondents reported actual roles in decisions that matched their preferred roles (role attainment). Proxies and patients were similarly likely to report role attainment (65% vs 63%). In adjusted analyses, proxies were more likely report role attainment (OR = 1.27, 95%CI = 1.02-1.59), but this difference was smaller if health variables were excluded from the model (OR = 1.14, 95%CI = 0.92-1.41).

CONCLUSION

Most patients' preferences for treatment participation were met. Surveys from proxies appear to yield small differences on the reports of attainment of preferred treatment decision-making roles in cancer care vs surveys from patients.

Treatment decision-making for older adults with cancer: A qualitative study

BACKGROUND

Independent decision-making is one of the basic rights of patients. However, in clinical practice, most older cancer patients' treatment decisions are made by family members.

OBJECTIVE

This study attempted to analyze the treatment decision-making process and formation mechanism for older cancer patients within the special cultural context of Chinese medical practice.

METHOD

A qualitative study was conducted. With the sample saturation principle, data collected by in-depth interviews with 17 family members and 12 patients were subjected to thematic analysis.

ETHICAL CONSIDERATIONS

The study was approved by the ethics committees of Sun Yat-sen University. All participants provided verbal informed consent after being told their rights of confidentiality, anonymity, and voluntary participation. They had the right to refuse to answer questions and could withdraw at any time.

RESULTS

Three themes emerged: (1) complex process; (2) transformation of family decision-making power; and (3) individual compromise. Family members inevitably had different opinions during the long process of treatment decision-making for older cancer patients. The direction of this process could be regarded as an extension of the family power relationship. The patient usually compromised the decision to survive, which was made by family members.

CONCLUSION

This study describes the treatment decision-making process of older cancer patients in the context of Chinese culture. The reasons underlying this process are related to the views on life and death and family values. An individual is a part of the family, which is often seen as the minimal interpersonal unit in Chinese society. It is significant that while emphasizing patient autonomy in the decision-making process, health professionals should also pay attention to the important roles of culture and family.

First insights on value-based healthcare of elders using ICHOM older person standard set reporting

BACKGROUND

Clinical guidelines for specific conditions fragment care provision for elders. The International Consortium for Health Outcomes Measurement (ICHOM) has developed a global standard set of outcome measures for comprehensive assessment of older persons. The goal of this study was to report value-based health metrics in Taiwan using this ICHOM toolset.

METHODS

The cross-sectional study of baseline data excerpted from a prospective longitudinal cohort, which recruited people ≥65 years old with ≥3 chronic medical conditions between July and December 2018. All participants received measurements of physical performance, anthropometric characteristics, health-related behaviors, Charlson Comorbidity Index, and Montreal Cognitive Assessment. The ICHOM toolset comprises three tiers: 1 includes frailty and having chosen a preferred place of death; 2 includes polypharmacy, falls, and participation in decision-making; and 3 includes loneliness, activities of daily living, pain, depression, and walking speed. These items were converted into a 0-10 point value-based healthcare score, with high value-based health status defined as ≥8/10 points.

RESULTS

Frequencies of individual ICHOM indicators were: frail 11.7%, chose preferred place of death 14.4%, polypharmacy 31.5%, fell 17.1%, participated in decision-making 81.6%, loneliness 26.8%, limited activities of daily living 22.4%, pain 10.4%, depressed mood 13.0%, and slowness 38.5%. People with high disease burden (OR 0.40, 95% CI 0.21-0.76, p = 0.005) or cognitive impairment (OR 0.49, 95%CI 0.27-0.87, p = 0.014) were less likely to have high value-based healthcare status.

CONCLUSIONS

The ICHOM Standard Set Older Person health outcome measures provide an opportunity to shift from a disease-centric medical paradigm to whole person-focused goals. This study identified advanced age, chronic disease burden and cognitive impairment as important barriers to achieving high value-based healthcare status.

Did You Get What You Wanted? Patient Satisfaction and Congruence Between Preferred and Perceived Roles in Medical Decision Making in a Hungarian National Survey

OBJECTIVES

In a growing number of countries, patient involvement in medical decisions is considered a cornerstone of broader health policy agendas. This study seeks to explore public preferences for and experiences with participation in treatment decisions in Hungary.

METHODS

A nationally representative online panel survey was conducted in 2019. Outcome measures included the Control Preferences Scale for the preferred and actual role in the decision, the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire, and a Satisfaction With Decision numeric rating scale.

RESULTS

A total of 1000 respondents participated in the study, 424 of whom reported having had a treatment decision in the preceding 6 months. Overall, 8%, 18%, 51%, 19%, and 4% of the population preferred an active, semiactive, shared, semipassive, and passive role in decision making, respectively. Corresponding rates for perceived role were as follows: 9%, 15%, 35%, 26%, and 15%. Preferred and perceived roles matched for 52% of the population, whereas 32% preferred more and 16% less participation. Better health status, attaining role congruence, and higher 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire scores were positively associated with satisfaction, accounting for 32% of the variation in Satisfaction With Decision scores (P < .05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study represents the first national survey on decisional roles in healthcare in Hungary and, more broadly, in Central and Eastern Europe. Shared decision making is the most preferred decisional role in Hungary; nevertheless, there is still room to improve patient involvement in decision making. It seems that patient satisfaction may be improved through tailoring the decisional role to reflect patients' preferences and through practices that encourage shared decision making.

Cancer patients' preferred and perceived level of involvement in treatment decision-making: an epidemiological study

Background: We aimed to analyze preferred and perceived levels of patients' involvement in treatment decision-making in a representative sample of cancer patients.Material and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, epidemiological cross-sectional study with a stratified random sample based on the incidence of cancer diagnoses in Germany. Data were collected between January 2008 and December 2010. Analyses were undertaken between 2017 and 2019. We included 5889 adult cancer patients across all cancer entities and disease stages from 30 acute care hospitals, outpatient facilities, and cancer rehabilitation clinics in five regions in Germany. We used the Control Preferences Scale to assess the preferred level of involvement and the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire to assess the perceived level of involvement.Results: About 4020 patients (mean age of 58 years, 51% female) completed the survey. Response rate was 68.3%. About a third each preferred patient-led, shared, or physician-led decision-making. About 50.7% perceived high levels, about a quarter each reported moderate (26.0%) or low (24.3%) levels of shared decision-making. Sex, age, relationship status, education, health care setting, and tumor entity were linked to preferred and/or perceived decision-making. Of those patients who preferred active involvement, about 50% perceived high levels of shared decision-making.Conclusion: The majority of patients with cancer wanted to be involved in medical decisions. Many patients perceived a high level of shared decision-making. However, many patients' level of involvement did not fit their preference. This study provides a solid basis for efforts to improve shared decision-making in German cancer care.

Engaging Caregivers in Health-Related Housing Decisions for Older Adults With Cognitive Impairment: A Cluster Randomized Trial

Background and Objectives

Informal caregivers are rarely as involved as they want to be in the housing decisions of cognitively impaired older adults. Lack of awareness of available options and their benefits and risks may lead to decisions that do not reflect older adults’ preferences, and to guilt and regret. We assessed the effect of training home care teams in interprofessional shared decision-making (SDM) on the proportion of caregivers who report being active in this decision.

Research Design and Methods

In a two-arm pragmatic cluster randomized trial with home care teams working in health centers in the Province of Quebec, we randomized health centers to receive training in interprofessional SDM (intervention) or not (control). Eligible caregivers had made a housing decision for a cognitively impaired adult aged 65 years or older who was receiving services from a home care team. The primary outcome was the proportion of caregivers reporting an active role in decision making. We performed intention-to-treat multilevel analysis.

Results

We consecutively enrolled a random group of 16 health centers and recruited 309 caregivers, among whom 296 were included in the analysis. In the intervention arm, the proportion of caregivers reporting an active role in decision making increased by 12% (95% CI −2% to 27%; p = .10). After removal of an influential cluster outlier, the proportion increased to 18% (95% CI: 7%–29%; p < .01).

Discussion and Implications

Training home care teams in interprofessional SDM increased caregiver involvement in health-related housing decisions for cognitively impaired older adults.

Translation and psychometric evaluation of the German version of the Organisational Readiness for Implementing Change measure (ORIC): a cross-sectional study

OBJECTIVES

To translate the Organisational Readiness for Implementing Change measure into German and assess its psychometric properties.

DESIGN

Cross-sectional psychometric study based on secondary analysis of baseline data from a shared decision-making implementation study.

SETTING

Three departments within one academic cancer centre in Hamburg, Germany.

PARTICIPANTS

For comprehensibility assessment of the translated ORIC version, we conducted cognitive interviews with healthcare professionals (HCPs, n=11). Afterwards, HCPs (n=230) filled out the measure.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The original English version of the ORIC was translated into German using a team translation protocol. Based on comprehensibility assessment via cognitive interviews with HCPs, the translated version was revised. We analysed acceptance (completion rate), factorial structure (exploratory factor analysis (EFA), confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), model fit), item characteristics (item difficulties, corrected item-total correlations, inter-item correlations) and internal consistency (Cronbach's α).

RESULTS

Translation and cognitive testing of the German ORIC was successful except for item 10, which showed low comprehensibility as part of content validity in cognitive interviews. Completion rate was >97%. EFA and CFA provided a one-factorial structure. Item difficulties ranged between 55.98 and 65.32, corrected item-total-correlation ranged between 0.665 and 0.774, inter-item correlations ranged between 0.434 and 0.723 and Cronbach's α was 0.93.

CONCLUSIONS

The German ORIC is a reliable measure with high completion rates and satisfying psychometric properties. A one-factorial structure of the German ORIC was confirmed. Item 10 showed limited comprehensibility and therefore reduces content validity of the measure. The German ORIC can be used to analyse organisational readiness for change as a precursor for implementation success of various interventions.