Dual equipoise shared decision making: definitions for decision and behaviour support interventions

Adult, adolescent, and caregiver preferences for attributes of topical treatments for mild-to-moderate atopic dermatitis: a discrete-choice experiment

Purpose: Topical treatments for mild-to-moderate (MM) atopic dermatitis (AD) include emollients, corticosteroids, calcineurin inhibitors, a Janus kinase inhibitor, and a phosphodiesterase 4 inhibitor, which differ in multiple ways. This study aimed to quantify the conditional relative importance (CRI) of attributes of topical treatments for MM AD among adult and adolescent patients and caregivers of children with MM AD.Materials and methods: A discrete-choice experiment (DCE) survey was administered to US adults and adolescents with MM AD and caregivers of children with MM AD. Each choice task comprised 2 hypothetical topical treatments characterized by efficacy, adverse events, vehicle, and application frequency. Data were analyzed using a random-parameters logit model to calculate the CRI of each attribute.Results and conclusions: 300 adults, 331 adolescents, and 330 caregivers completed the DCE. Avoiding changes in skin color (CRI 29.0) and time until itch improves (26.6) were most important to adults, followed by time until clear/almost clear skin (17.8). Application frequency (3.0) did not have a statistically significant impact on adults' choices. Adolescents were less concerned about changes in skin color than adults or caregivers; caregivers were less concerned about time until clear/almost clear skin than patients. Physicians should consider age-relevant aspects of preferences in treatment discussions with patients and caregivers.

The Development and Evaluation of Novel Patient Educational Material for a Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) Result in Hereditary Cancer Genes

A Variant of Uncertain Significance (VUS) is a difference in the DNA sequence with uncertain consequences for gene function. A VUS in a hereditary cancer gene should not change medical care, yet some patients undergo medical procedures based on their VUS result, highlighting the unmet educational needs among patients and healthcare providers. To address this need, we developed, evaluated, and refined novel educational materials to explain that while VUS results do not change medical care, it remains important to share any personal or family history of cancer with family members given that their personal and family medical history can guide their cancer risk management. We began by reviewing the prior literature and transcripts from interviews with six individuals with a VUS result to identify content and design considerations to incorporate into educational materials. We then gathered feedback to improve materials via a focus group of multidisciplinary experts and multiple rounds of semi-structured interviews with individuals with a VUS result. Themes for how to improve content, visuals, and usefulness were used to refine the materials. In the final round of interviews with an additional 10 individuals with a VUS result, materials were described as relatable, useful, factual, and easy to navigate, and also increased their understanding of cancer gene VUS results.

A Decision Aid for Patients Considering Surgery for Sciatica: Codesign and User-Testing With Patients and Clinicians

BACKGROUND

Surgery can help patients with leg pain caused by sciatica recover faster, but by 12 months outcomes are similar to nonsurgical management. For many the decision to have surgery may require reflection, and patient decision aids are an evidence-based clinical tool that can help guide patients through this decision.

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to develop and refine a decision aid for patients with sciatica who are deciding whether to have surgery or 'wait and see' (i.e., try nonsurgical management first).

DESIGN

Semistructured interviews with think-aloud user-testing protocol.

PARTICIPANTS

Twenty clinicians and 20 patients with lived experience of low back pain or sciatica.

OUTCOME MEASURES

Items from Technology Acceptance Model, Preparation for Decision Making Scale and Decision Quality Instrument for Herniated Disc 2.0 (knowledge instrument).

METHODS

The prototype integrated relevant research with working group perspectives, decision aid standards and health literacy guidelines. The research team refined the prototype through seven rounds of user-testing, which involved discussing user-testing feedback and implementing changes before progressing to the next round.

RESULTS

As a result of working group feedback, the decision aid was divided into sections: before, during and after a visit to the surgeon. Across all rounds of user-testing, clinicians rated the resource 5.9/7 (SD = 1.0) for perceived usefulness, and 6.0/7 for perceived ease of use (SD = 0.8). Patients reported the decision aid was easy to understand, on average correctly answering 3.4/5 knowledge questions (SD = 1.2) about surgery for sciatica. The grade reading score for the website was 9.0. Patients scored highly on preparation for decision-making (4.4/5, SD = 0.7), suggesting strong potential to empower patients. Interview feedback showed that patients and clinicians felt the decision aid would encourage question-asking and help patients reflect on personal values.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians found the decision aid acceptable, patients found it was easy to understand and both groups felt it would empower patients to actively engage in their care and come to an informed decision that aligned with personal values. Input from the working group and user-testing was crucial for ensuring that the decision aid met patient and clinician needs.

PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION

Patients and clinicians contributed to prototype development via the working group.

User-Centered Development of a Patient Decision Aid for Choice of Early Abortion Method: Multi-Cycle Mixed Methods Study

BACKGROUND

People seeking abortion in early pregnancy have the choice between medication and procedural options for care. The choice is preference-sensitive-there is no clinically superior option and the choice depends on what matters most to the individual patient. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) are shared decision-making tools that support people in making informed, values-aligned health care choices.

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to develop and evaluate the usability of a web-based PtDA for the Canadian context, where abortion care is publicly funded and available without legal restriction.

METHODS

We used a systematic, user-centered design approach guided by principles of integrated knowledge translation. We first developed a prototype using available evidence for abortion seekers' decisional needs and the risks, benefits, and consequences of each option. We then refined the prototype through think-aloud interviews with participants at risk of unintended pregnancy ("patient" participants). Interviews were audio-recorded and documented through field notes. Finally, we conducted a web-based survey of patients and health care professionals involved with abortion care, which included the System Usability Scale. We used content analysis to identify usability issues described in the field notes and open-ended survey questions, and descriptive statistics to summarize participant characteristics and close-ended survey responses.

RESULTS

A total of 61 individuals participated in this study. Further, 11 patients participated in think-aloud interviews. Overall, the response to the PtDA was positive; however, the content analysis identified issues related to the design, language, and information about the process and experience of obtaining abortion care. In response, we adapted the PtDA into an interactive website and revised it to include consistent and plain language, additional information (eg, pain experience narratives), and links to additional resources on how to find an abortion health care professional. In total, 25 patients and 25 health care professionals completed the survey. The mean System Usability Scale score met the threshold for good usability among both patient and health care professional participants. Most participants felt that the PtDA was user-friendly (patients: n=25, 100%; health care professionals: n=22, 88%), was not missing information (patients: n=21, 84%; health care professionals: n=18, 72%), and that it was appropriate for patients to complete the PtDA before a consultation (patients: n=23, 92%; health care professionals: n=23, 92%). Open-ended responses focused on improving usability by reducing the length of the PtDA and making the website more mobile-friendly.

CONCLUSIONS

We systematically designed the PtDA to address an unmet need to support informed, values-aligned decision-making about the method of abortion. The design process responded to a need identified by potential users and addressed unique sensitivities related to reproductive health decision-making.

Anaphylaxis: A 2023 practice parameter update

This practice parameter update focuses on 7 areas in which there are new evidence and new recommendations. Diagnostic criteria for anaphylaxis have been revised, and patterns of anaphylaxis are defined. Measurement of serum tryptase is important for diagnosis of anaphylaxis and to identify underlying mast cell disorders. In infants and toddlers, age-specific symptoms may differ from older children and adults, patient age is not correlated with reaction severity, and anaphylaxis is unlikely to be the initial reaction to an allergen on first exposure. Different community settings for anaphylaxis require specific measures for prevention and treatment of anaphylaxis. Optimal prescribing and use of epinephrine autoinjector devices require specific counseling and training of patients and caregivers, including when and how to administer the epinephrine autoinjector and whether and when to call 911. If epinephrine is used promptly, immediate activation of emergency medical services may not be required if the patient experiences a prompt, complete, and durable response. For most medical indications, the risk of stopping or changing beta-blocker or angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor medication may exceed the risk of more severe anaphylaxis if the medication is continued, especially in patients with insect sting anaphylaxis. Evaluation for mastocytosis, including a bone marrow biopsy, should be considered for adult patients with severe insect sting anaphylaxis or recurrent idiopathic anaphylaxis. After perioperative anaphylaxis, repeat anesthesia may proceed in the context of shared decision-making and based on the history and results of diagnostic evaluation with skin tests or in vitro tests when available, and supervised challenge when necessary.

Shared Decision-Making in Pediatrics

This article briefly reviews a 4-step process for implementing shared decision-making (SDM) in pediatrics. The authors address difficulties with determining whether SDM should occur and comment on how the SDM process relates to, and may be conflated with, other decision-making models that leverage similar patient-centered and family-centered communication strategies.

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.

Patient Preferences for Ulcerative Colitis Treatment in the Middle East Region: A Discrete-Choice Experiment

Background and Aims

Treatments for ulcerative colitis (UC) differ in safety, efficacy, and route of administration; patient preferences for treatment attributes should be considered in treatment decisions. No study to date has explored patient preferences for moderate-to-severe UC treatment in Middle Eastern countries.

Methods

A discrete-choice experiment aimed to quantify treatment preferences in patients with moderate-to-severe UC in 5 Middle Eastern countries (Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, and Lebanon). Respondents chose between experimentally designed profiles for hypothetical UC treatments with varying efficacy (time until UC symptoms improve and chance of UC symptom control after 1 year), side effects (annual risk of serious infection, 5-year risk of malignancy), mode and frequency of administration, and need for occasional steroid use. A random-parameters logit model was used to estimate preference weights for these attributes, from which conditional relative importance estimates and maximum acceptable increases in risks of serious infection and malignancy were derived.

Results

Among 365 adults with moderate-to-severe UC who completed the survey (mean age, 36 years; 50% female), 5-year risk of malignancy and symptom control after 1 year had the greatest conditional relative importance. Respondents were generally willing to accept statistically significant increases in annual risk of serious infection and 5-year risk of malignancy in exchange for better efficacy, changes in mode of administration and dosing schedule, and avoiding occasional steroid use.

Conclusion

Of the attributes evaluated, individuals with UC in Middle Eastern countries most value avoiding 5-year risk of malignancy and a higher probability of symptom control, on average.

Effect of a prediction tool and communication skills training on communication of treatment outcomes: a multicenter stepped wedge clinical trial (the SOURCE trial)

Background

For cancer patients to effectively engage in decision making, they require comprehensive and understandable information regarding treatment options and their associated outcomes. We developed an online prediction tool and supporting communication skills training to assist healthcare providers (HCPs) in this complex task. This study aims to assess the impact of this combined intervention (prediction tool and training) on the communication practices of HCPs when discussing treatment options.

Methods

We conducted a multicenter intervention trial using a pragmatic stepped wedge design (NCT04232735). Standardized Patient Assessments (simulated consultations) using cases of esophageal and gastric cancer patients, were performed before and after the combined intervention (March 2020 to July 2022). Audio recordings were analyzed using an observational coding scale, rating all utterances of treatment outcome information on the primary outcome-precision of provided outcome information-and on secondary outcomes-such as: personalization, tailoring and use of visualizations. Pre vs. post measurements were compared in order to assess the effect of the intervention.

Findings

31 HCPs of 11 different centers in the Netherlands participated. The tool and training significantly affected the precision of the overall communicated treatment outcome information (p = 0.001, median difference 6.93, IQR (-0.32 to 12.44)). In the curative setting, survival information was significantly more precise after the intervention (p = 0.029). In the palliative setting, information about side effects was more precise (p < 0.001).

Interpretation

A prediction tool and communication skills training for HCPs improves the precision of treatment information on outcomes in simulated consultations. The next step is to examine the effect of such interventions on communication in clinical practice and on patient-reported outcomes.

Funding

Financial support for this study was provided entirely by a grant from the Dutch Cancer Society (UVA 2014-7000).

Expert Consensus for the Use of Outpatient Rehabilitation Visits After Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Delphi Study

OBJECTIVE: There is no consensus for how to use rehabilitation visits after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). We sought to develop expert recommendations for outpatient rehabilitation visit usage after TKA. DESIGN: Delphi study. METHODS: First, we developed a broad list of preliminary visit usage recommendations, which were specific to patients' recovery status (ie, slow, typical, or fast recovery) and time since surgery. We then invited 49 TKA experts to participate on a Delphi panel. During round 1, we surveyed panelists regarding their level of agreement with each preliminary recommendation. We conducted additional Delphi rounds as needed to build consensus, which we defined using the RAND/UCLA method. We updated the survey each round based on panelist feedback and responses from the previous round. RESULTS: Thirty panelists agreed to participate, and 29 panelists completed 2 Delphi rounds. The panel reached consensus on recommendations related to visit frequency, visit timing, and the use of telerehabilitation. The panel recommended that outpatient rehabilitation should begin within 1 week after surgery at a frequency of 2 times per week for the first postoperative month regardless of recovery status. The panel recommended different visit frequencies depending on the patient's recovery status for postoperative months 2 to 3. The panel agreed that telerehabilitation can be recommended for most patients after TKA, but not for patients recovering slowly. CONCLUSION: We used the Delphi process to develop expert recommendations for the use of outpatient rehabilitation visits after TKA. We envision these recommendations could help patients decide how to use visits based on their own preferences. J Orthop Sports Phys Ther 2023;53(9):1-9. Epub: 10 July 2023. doi:10.2519/jospt.2023.11840.

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.

Shared decision making with schizophrenic patients: a randomized controlled clinical trial with booster sessions (DECIDE Study)

BACKGROUND

The treatment of schizophrenia requires a prolonged, multidimensional intervention that includes antipsychotic drugs. Treatment adherence is essential to effectively control the disorder. Shared decision-making (SDM) is a strategy, supported by numerous practical and ethical arguments, that seeks to involve patients in the therapeutic process to improve treatment adherence and satisfaction. The use of this model in mental health has been limited for many intrinsic and extrinsic reasons. The results of clinical trials conducted to date have largely been disappointing, potential due to study design-related limitations.

AIM/QUESTION

To evaluate the efficacy, in terms of treatment adherence and improvement in clinical variables, such as severity of symptoms, days of hospitalization or insight, of a carefully timed SDM model initiated immediately prior to hospital discharge in patients with schizophrenia.

METHODS

Single-blind, randomized clinical trial in an acute psychiatric care unit within the Andalusian Health Department to compare SDM (experimental group) to treatment as usual (TAU; control group) in a sample of patients hospitalized for an acute episode of schizophrenia or schizoaffective disorder. The study was performed between January 2014 and June 2017. The experimental group participated in SDM sessions prior to discharge with regular booster sessions over the one-year follow-up. The health care team responsible for SDM was predisposed to concordance (LatCon II scale) and received specific training in SDM. A hierarchical multiple linear regression analysis was performed to evaluate the factors independently associated with adherence, controlling for sociodemographic, clinical, and admission-related variables. Variables were assessed at admission, discharge and at 3, 6 and 12 months after discharge during the one year follow up. BARS, DAI, WAI-S, COMRADE and PANSS were used to evaluate adherence, attitude to treatment, therapeutic alliance, satisfaction and confidence with decision and clinical status, respectively.

RESULTS

A total of 227 schizophrenic patients hospitalized with acute decompensation were evaluated; of these, 102 met all inclusion criteria and were included in the study. Most patients (95%) had prior experience with antipsychotics and most (82%) had experienced related side effects. Despite randomization, psychopathologic severity was greater in the experimental group, with a mean (SD) PANSS score of 104.08 (80) vs. 93.45 (20.30) (p < 0.05). The final regression model to explain adherence was significant (adjusted R2 = 0.384; F [df= 6] = 4.386; p < 0.001), with a direct, significant and independent association with SDM mediated by the number of booster sessions.

DISCUSSION

Shared decision making with booster sessions appears to increase treatment adherence in patients with severe mental disorders.

IMPLICATION ON PRACTICE

Ethical, practical, and clinical reasons support the use of strategies designed promote the use of long-term, shared decision-making in psychiatric patients, especially in schizophrenia spectrum disorder.

How should patient decision aids for schizophrenia treatment be designed? - A scoping review

Despite the clear rationale for applying shared decision-making in the context of the preference sensitive decision for or against antipsychotics and the upswing of patient decision aids (pDAs) to support this process, there is still a lack of knowledge regarding which key features are crucial for pDAs in schizophrenia treatment. A scoping review according to the PRISMA-SRc was conducted to inform on crucial key features and quality indicators. The review focussed on the following seven aspects for investigating pDAs: (1) Types of decision aids, (2) Values, (3) Decision Guidance, (4) Output of the decision aid, (5) Target group, (6) Effectiveness according to publication and (7) Decision aid evaluation. Eleven studies which addressed six unique decision aids met the eligibility criteria. There were major differences in the design as well as in the development of the decision aids. Three aspects emerged that should be given special consideration in the design of such tools for antipsychotics: the evidence used by the decision aid, the algorithm for translating evidence into a decision aid and finally the presentation of the evidence. We recommend the use of data with a high level of evidence and to combine it with individualized treatment by taking into account patient preferences and previous experiences as well as comparing them with clinical assessments. Fully computerized decision aids that use complicated algorithms, for example, by merging treatment effects with patient characteristics to suggest an appropriate treatment at the end, tend to be paternalistic and thus not appropriate for SDM, in our view. In addition, possible cognitive deficits need to be considered when presenting the output of decision aids for antipsychotics.

Effects of a shared decision making intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions: the DICO study

BACKGROUND

To evaluate the effects of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs).

METHODS

A pragmatic trial evaluated the effects of the SDM^MCC intervention, existing of SDM training for nine geriatricians in two hospitals and a preparatory tool for patients. A prospective pre-intervention post-intervention multi-center clinical study was conducted in which an usual care group of older patients with MCC and their informal caregivers was included before the implementation of the intervention and a new cohort of patients and informal caregivers after the implementation of the intervention. SDM was observed using the OPTION^MCC during video-recorded consultations. Patient- and caregivers reported outcomes regarding their role in SDM, involvement, perceived SDM and decisional conflict were measured. The differences between groups regarding the level of observed SDM (OPTION^MCC) were analyzed with a mixed model analysis. Dichotomous patient-reported outcomes were analyzed with a logistic mixed model.

RESULTS

From two outpatient geriatric clinics 216 patients with MCCs participated. The mean age was 77.3 years, and 56.3% of patients were female. No significant difference was found in the overall level of SDM as measured with the OPTION^MCC or in patient-reported outcomes. However, at item level the items discussing 'goals', 'options', and 'decision making' significantly improved after the intervention. The items discussing 'partnership' and 'evaluating the decision-making process' showed a significant decrease. Fifty-two percent of the patients completed the preparatory tool, but the results were only discussed in 12% of the consultations.

CONCLUSION

This study provides scope for improvement of SDM in geriatrics. Engaging older adults with MCCs and informal caregivers in the decision making process should be an essential part of SDM training for geriatricians, beyond the SDM steps of explaining options, benefits and harms. More attention should be paid to the integration of preparatory work in the consultation.

For which decisions is Shared Decision Making considered appropriate? - A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To identify decision characteristics for which SDM authors deem SDM appropriate or not, and what arguments are used.

METHODS

We applied two search strategies: we included SDM models from an earlier review (strategy 1) and conducted a new search in eight databases to include papers other than describing an SDM model, such as original research, opinion papers and reviews (strategy 2).

RESULTS

From the 92 included papers, we identified 18 decision characteristics for which authors deemed SDM appropriate, including preference-sensitive, equipoise and decisions where patient commitment is needed in implementing the decision. SDM authors indicated limits to SDM, especially when there are immediate life-saving measures needed. We identified four decision characteristics on which authors of different papers disagreed on whether or not SDM is appropriate.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this review show the broad range of decision characteristics for which authors deem SDM appropriate, the ambiguity of some, and potential limits of SDM.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

The findings can stimulate clinicians to (re)consider pursuing SDM in situations in which they did not before. Additionally, it can inform SDM campaigns and educational programs as it shows for which decision situations SDM might be more or less challenging to practice.

[Choosing Wisely in Patients with Polypharmacy]

Choosing Wisely in Patients with Polypharmacy Abstract. Polypharmacy and potentially inappropriate medication have a negative impact on health. For reducing or stopping medication (deprescribing) patient benefits are crucial. The following stepwise approach has turned out to be successful: a. ask patients to bring along all their medication and compare them with the current medication list; b. offer shared decision making; c. evaluate every drug for indication, balance between benefit and harm, side effects and dose; d. prioritize benefit and harm according to values, preferences and goals of the patient; e. decide together about deprescribing; f. track changes in the medication plan und arrange a follow-up consultation. We illustrate this approach by the example of an older, frail female patient with polypharmacy. Deprescribing is just as important for patients' well-being as is prescribing!

Patient Perceptions of a Decision Support Tool for Men with Localized Prostate Cancer

Purpose. To evaluate patient perceptions of a Web-based decision aid for the treatment of localized prostate cancer. Methods. We assessed patient perceptions of a multicomponent, Web-based decision aid with a preference elicitation/values clarification exercise using adaptive conjoint analysis, the generation of a summary report, and provision of information about localized prostate cancer treatment options. Using a think-aloud approach, we conducted 21 cognitive interviews with prostate cancer patients presented with the decision aid prior to seeing their urologist. Thematic content analysis was used to examine patient perceptions of the tool's components and content prior to engaging in shared decision making with their clinician. Results. Five themes were identified: 1) patients had some negative emotional reactions to the tool, pointing out what they perceived to be unnecessarily negative framing and language used; 2) patients were forced to stop and think about preferences while going through the tool and found this deliberation to be useful; 3) patients were confused by the tool; 4) patients tried to discern the intent of the conjoint analysis questions; and 5) there was a disconnect between patients' negative reactions while using the tool and a contrasting general satisfaction with the final "values profile" created by the tool. Conclusions. Studies are needed to explore the disconnect between patients' expressing negative reactions while going through some components of decision aids but satisfaction with the final output. In particular, we hypothesize that this effect might be explained by cognitive biases such as choice-supportive bias, hindsight bias, and the "IKEA effect." This is one of the first projects to elicit patient reactions while they were completing a decision aid, and we recommend further similar, qualitative postprocess evaluation studies.

Highlights

We explored perceptions of a decision aid with education about localized prostate cancer treatment and preference elicitation using adaptive conjoint analysis.Patients found the tool useful but were also confused by it, tried to discern the intent of the questions, and expressed negative emotional reactions.In particular, there was a disconnect between patients' negative reactions while using the tool and general satisfaction with the final values profile generated by the tool, which is an area for future research.

Development and pilot testing of a decision aid for navigating breast cancer survivorship care

BACKGROUND

The predominant oncologist-led model in many countries is unsustainable to meet the needs of a growing cohort of breast cancer survivors (BCS). Despite available alternative models, adoption rates have been poor. To help BCS navigate survivorship care, we aimed to systematically develop a decision aid (DA) to guide their choice of follow-up care model and evaluate its acceptability and usability among BCS and health care providers (HCPs).

METHODS

We recruited BCS aged ≥ 21 years who have completed primary treatment and understand English. BCS receiving palliative care or with cognitive impairment were excluded. HCPs who routinely discussed post-treatment care with BCS were purposively sampled based on disciplines. Each participant reviewed the DA during a semi-structured interview using the 'think aloud' approach and completed an acceptability questionnaire. Descriptive statistics and directed content analysis were used.

RESULTS

We conducted three rounds of alpha testing with 15 BCS and 8 HCPs. All BCS found the final DA prototype easy to navigate with sufficient interactivity. The information imbalance favouring the shared care option perceived by 60% of BCS in early rounds was rectified. The length of DA was optimized to be 'just right'. Key revisions made included (1) presenting care options side-by-side to improve perceived information balance, (2) creating dedicated sections explaining HCPs' care roles to address gaps in health system contextual knowledge, and (3) employing a multicriteria decision analysis method for preference clarification exercise to reflect the user's openness towards shared care. Most BCS (73%) found the DA useful for decision-making, and 93% were willing to discuss the DA with their HCPs. Most HCPs (88%) agreed that the DA was a reliable tool and would be easily integrated into routine care.

CONCLUSIONS

Our experience highlighted the need to provide contextual information on the health care system for decisions related to care delivery. Developers should address potential variability within the care model and clarify inherent biases, such as low confidence levels in primary care. Future work could expand on the developed DA's informational structure to apply to other care models and leverage artificial intelligence to optimize information delivery.

Patient preferences for cancer screening in chronic kidney disease: a best-worst scaling survey

BACKGROUND

Despite an increased cancer risk for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD), uptake of cancer screening varies due to competing priorities and complex health-related issues. This study aimed to elicit the preferences and important attributes of cancer screening in patients with CKD.

METHODS

An on-line best-worst scaling survey was used to ascertain the relative importance of 22 screening attributes among CKD patients using an incomplete block design. Preference scores (0-1) were calculated by multinomial logistic regression. Preference heterogeneity was evaluated.

RESULTS

The survey was completed by 83 patients: 26 not requiring kidney replacement therapy, 20 receiving dialysis and 37 transplant recipients (mean age 59 years, 53% men, 75% prior to cancer screening). The five most important attributes were early detection {preference score 1.0 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.90-1.10]}, decreased risk of cancer death [0.85 (0.75-0.94)], false negatives [0.71 (0.61-0.80)], reduction in immunosuppression if detected [0.68 (0.59-0.78)] and non-invasive interventions after positive results [0.68 (0.59-0.78)]. Preference heterogeneity reflected the stage of CKD. Immunosuppression reduction [mean difference 0.11 (95% CI 0.02-0.19)] and views of family/friends [0.10 (reference attribute)] were important for transplant recipients. Screening frequency [-0.18 (95% CI -0.26 to -0.10)] and overdiagnosis of harmless cancers [-0.14 (95% CI -0.22 to -0.10)] were important for dialysis patients.

CONCLUSION

Early detection, risk of cancer-related death, false negatives, immunosuppression reduction and non-invasive interventions following detection are important cancer screening considerations among CKD patients. Patient preferences are key to shared decision-making and individualized cancer screening.

Interventions supporting cancer patients in making decisions regarding participation in clinical trials - a systematic review

OBJECTIVES

Existing research on the perspectives of patients with cancer and health care professionals indicates that patient decision making on cancer clinical trial participation is a complex process and may be poorly understood, possibly compromising their decision to participate. This systematic review investigates interventions that support patients in their decision-making processes regarding whether to participate or not and assesses the qualities of the interventions, measures used and related outcomes.

METHODS

Six databases were systematically searched and only studies evaluating interventions that support the decision making of adult patients offered to enter a cancer clinical trial were included. Ten articles met the criteria and were analysed using a narrative synthesis approach.

RESULTS

The research focus of the included studies reflected the multifactorial nature of what constitutes support for patient decision making in terms of entering a cancer clinical trial. However, most interventions were based on the hypothesis that more information leads to support in decision making, and did not take other factors, such as the relationship to the clinical staff or relatives, the patients' strong hope for therapeutic benefit or other existential needs into account. The interventions were primarily based on a specific tool, executed once, which seems to imply that decisions need only to be supported once and not at several time points throughout the decision process, and did not assess the importance of a patient's family- or social relations. Moreover, few interventions focused on the patients' counselling experience or assessed patient preferences in relation to decision making.

CONCLUSIONS

The findings demonstrate a lack of research on interventions to support patients' decision making that takes other factors, apart from improving knowledge of trials, into account. Limited evidence exists on the effectiveness of decision support interventions to improve the experience of support in adult patients with cancer. Interventions that take patient preferences in relation to decision making and the social context of decision processes into account need to be developed and assessed.

Veterinary technicians contribute to shared decision-making during companion animal veterinary appointments

OBJECTIVE

To describe and compare veterinary professionals' use of shared decision-making during companion animal appointments.

DESIGN

Multi-practice cross-sectional study.

SAMPLE

A purposive sample of 4 companion animal veterinary clinics in a group practice in Texas.

PROCEDURES

A convenience sample of veterinary appointments were recorded January to March 2018 and audio-recordings were analyzed using the Observer OPTION5 instrument to assess shared decision-making. Each decision was categorized by veterinary professional involvement.

RESULTS

A total of 76/85 (89%) appointments included at least 1 decision between the client and veterinary professional(s), with a total of 129 shared decisions. Decisions that involved both a veterinary technician and veterinarian scored significantly higher for elements of shared decision-making (OPTION5 = 29.5 ± 8.4; n = 46), than veterinarian-only decisions (OPTION5 = 25.4 ± 11.50; P = .040; n = 63), and veterinary technician-only decisions (OPTION5 = 22.5 ± 7.15; P = .001; n = 20). Specific elements of shared decision-making that differed significantly based on veterinary professional involvement included educating the client about options (OPTION5 Item 3; P = .0041) and integrating the client's preference (OPTION5 Item 5; P = .0010).

CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Findings suggest that clients are more involved in decision making related to their pet's health care when both the veterinary technician and veterinarian communicate with the client. Veterinary technicians' communication significantly enhanced client engagement in decision-making when working collaboratively with the veterinarian.

Patient-clinician communication and patient-centered outcomes among patients with suspected stage I non-small cell lung cancer: a prospective cohort study

Among patients with suspected early-stage non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), we sought to evaluate the association of patient-clinician communication (PCC) with patient-centered outcomes (PCOs). We conducted a multicenter, prospective cohort study examining PCOs at five time points, up to 12-months post-treatment. We used generalized estimating equation (GEE) models adjusted for sociodemographic and clinical variables to examine the relationship between PCC (dichotomized as high- or low-quality) and decisional conflict, treatment self-efficacy, and anxiety. The cohort included 165 patients who were 62% male with a mean age of 70.7 ± SD 8.1 years. Adjusted GEE analysis including 810 observations revealed high-quality PCC was associated with no decisional conflict (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.14, 95% CI = 0.07 to 0.27) and higher self-efficacy (β = -0.26, 95% CI = -0.37 to -0.14). High-quality PCC was not associated with moderately severe anxiety (aOR = 0.68, 95% CI = 0.41 to 1.09), though was associated with decreased anxiety scores (β = -3.91, 95% CI = -6.48 to -1.35). Among individuals with suspected early-stage NSCLC, high-quality PCC is associated with less decisional conflict and higher self-efficacy; the relationship with anxiety is unclear. Clinicians should prioritize enhanced treatment-related communication at critical and vulnerable periods in the cancer care trajectory to improve PCOs.

Understanding PrEP decision making among pregnant women in Lilongwe, Malawi: A mixed-methods study

INTRODUCTION

Pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) is a promising tool for HIV prevention during pregnancy. With increasing rollout in antenatal settings, counselling strategies to help pregnant women make appropriate decisions about PrEP use are needed. Understanding women's motivations and concerns for PrEP use-and how these inform their decision making and feelings about the decision to start PrEP-are critical to inform these strategies.

METHODS

We conducted a convergent mixed-methods study from June 2020 to June 2021 in the context of a PrEP adherence support trial among HIV-negative pregnant women in Lilongwe, Malawi. Two hundred women completed a survey reporting their motivations and concerns about PrEP use, and their feelings about the decision to start PrEP (Decisional Regret Scale). Thirty women completed in-depth interviews to better understand the decision-making process, including motivations and concerns weighed in women's decision to use PrEP. Analyses comprised descriptive and bivariate statistics, thematic qualitative analysis, and integration of quantitative and qualitative results.

RESULTS

Women initiating PrEP during pregnancy were highly motivated to obtain HIV protection for themselves and their unborn child, often due to perceived HIV risk connoted by a recent sexually transmitted infection and/or concerns about partner non-monogamy. These motivations prevailed despite some concerns about safety and side effects, anticipated stigmatization, and concerns about adherence burden and pill attributes. Many women had informed their partner of their decision to use PrEP yet few felt their decision was contingent upon partner approval. Most women felt positively about the decision to start PrEP (mean decisional regret = 1.2 out of 5), but those with a greater number of concerns reported greater decisional regret (B = 0.036; p = 0.005). Furthermore, women who were specifically concerned about partner disclosure, who disliked pills or who had no perceived HIV risk reported greater decisional regret.

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnant women were strongly motivated by the promise of HIV protection offered by PrEP and accepted it despite diverse concerns. A shared decision-making approach that centres pregnant women and offers partner involvement may help identify and address initial concerns about PrEP use and support prevention-effective use of PrEP during this important period.

The Role of Attribute Screening and Choice Set Formation in Health Discrete Choice Experiments: Modeling the Impact of Benefit and Risk Attributes

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to demonstrate the econometric modeling of benefit/risk-based choice set formation (CSF) within health-related discrete choice experiments.

METHODS

In 4 different case studies, first, a trade-off model was fitted; building on this, a screening model was fitted; and finally, a full CSF model was estimated. This final model allows for attributes to be used first to screen out alternatives from choice tasks before respondents' trade-off attributes and make a choice among feasible alternatives. Educational level and health literacy of respondents were accounted for in all models.

RESULTS

Model fit in terms of log likelihood, pseudo-R², Akaike information criterion, and Bayesian information criterion improved from using only trade-off or screening models compared with CSF models in 3 of the 4 case studies. In those studies, significant screening behavior was identified that (1) affected trade-off inferences, (2) rejects the pure trade-off model, and (3) supports the existence of screening on the basis of benefit-risk profiles, and other attributes. Educational level and health literacy showed significant interactions with multiple attributes in all case studies.

CONCLUSIONS

Choice modelers should pay close attention to noncompensatory respondent behavior when they include benefit or risk attributes in their discrete choice experiment. Further studies should investigate why and when respondents undertake screening behavior. Screening behavior in choice data analysis is always a possibility, so researchers should explore extensions of econometric models to reflect noncompensatory behavior. Assuming that benefit and risk attributes will only affect trade-off behavior is likely to lead to biased conclusions about benefit or risk-based behavior.

Ethical Considerations for Discrete Choice Experiments with Caregivers

We discuss research ethics challenges experienced while running a discrete choice experiment administered to caregivers of children with treatment resistant pediatric epilepsy. We highlight ethical considerations around the study design of the discrete choice experimental paradigm that pertain to vulnerability of and caregiving burden on the population, imbalance of benefit-to-load of participation, and limitations of cultural meaningfulness and generalizability.

Do Physicians Prefer Natural Drugs?

Abstract. Background: There is a bias for natural versus synthetic drugs in general populations. Aims: We investigated whether physicians who have advanced medical and scientific training and routinely prescribe drugs exhibit this bias. Methods: Physicians and non-physicians were presented with a hypothetical medical situation in which pharmacological therapy was required. Participants were asked if they would prefer a natural or synthetic drug for treatment. Physicians were also asked which drug they would prescribe to a patient. Results: In a forced-choice paradigm, non-physicians (87.5%) and physicians (79.2%) had an equally strong bias for the natural drug, with physicians (74.3%) also preferring the natural drug for patients. When a 9-point drug choice scale was used, including a “no preference” choice (5), non-physicians ( M = 6.91) and physicians ( M = 5.41) again showed a preference for the natural drug compared to the mid-point of the scale, but the non-physicians’ bias was stronger. Physicians no longer preferred the natural drug for patients ( M = 5.15). Limitations: The participants do not represent a random sample and therefore may not represent physicians/non-physicians in general. Additionally, the responses were hypothetical and may not represent behavior in actual medical contexts. Conclusion: These data indicate that physicians and non-physicians exhibit a bias for natural drugs, with physicians also demonstrating a bias for prescribing natural drugs. However, the bias is reduced in physicians compared to non-physicians when a “no preference” option is available, suggesting that advanced medical and/or scientific training may be beneficial in minimizing this bias.

Development of a Patient Decision Aid to Support Shared Decision Making for Patients with Recurrent High-Grade Glioma

When high-grade gliomas recur, patients, their families, and clinicians face difficult medical decisions. There is no curable treatment, and the treatment options all come with a risk of complications and adverse effects. The patients are often cognitively affected, and they need tailored decision support. The objective of this study was to develop a patient decision aid (PtDA) targeted at patients with recurrent high-grade gliomas. Based on existing knowledge and the International Patient Decision Aids Standards, the PtDA was developed through an iterative process. The PtDA was alpha-tested by potential users to assess its acceptability and usability. The development team comprised three clinicians, two patients, two family members, and a researcher. The fifth version of the PtDA was submitted to the alpha test. Eleven patients, nine family members, and eleven clinicians assessed the PtDA and found it acceptable. Three changes were made during the alpha test. Most participants perceived the PtDA to prepare patients for decision making and improve consultations. The involvement of potential users was emphasized during the development and alpha test process. The PtDA was assessed as useful and acceptable by patients, family members, and clinicians in the decision-making situation of recurrent high-grade glioma.

Decisional needs of patients with recurrent high-grade glioma and their families

Background

High-grade gliomas are aggressive and life-threatening brain tumors. At the time of recurrence, the patients and their families need to decide on future treatment. None of the treatment options are curative, and tradeoffs between benefits and harms must be made. This study aimed to explore the patients’ and family members’ decisional needs when making the decision.

Methods

We performed semi-structured individual interviews with patients and family members to explore their experiences during the decision making. A phenomenological hermeneutical analysis was conducted.

Results

A total of 15 patients and 14 family members aged 22-79 years participated in the study. Most of the family members were partners to the patient. The findings were centered around three interrelated and concurrently occurring themes: (I) A patient- and family-centered decision making, including the subtheme of being a supportive family member; (II) Balanced information and a trustful professional encounter; and (III) The value of hope. We found that both the patients and family members preferred to be involved in the decision making and that a trustful relationship with the surgeon, balanced and tailored information, and sufficient time to make the decision were essential. The experience of hope had a significant influence on patients’ decisions.

Conclusion

This study found that patient and family involvement, balanced information, and hope were the primary decisional needs of patients and family members at the time of recurrent high-grade glioma. Patients and family members can have different decisional needs, making individual needs assessment essential to decisional support.

"I feel reassured, but there is no guarantee." How do women with a future childbearing desire respond to active surveillance of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2? A qualitative study

INTRODUCTION

In Denmark, women with a future childbearing desire diagnosed with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia grade 2 (CIN2) are recommended active surveillance instead of excisional treatment. However, we have limited and contradictory knowledge about how active surveillance of CIN2 may affect women emotionally. The aim of this study was to explore thoughts and emotional responses in women undergoing active surveillance of CIN2 and to explore how active surveillance may affect women's future childbearing desire.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

This qualitative study was conducted in the gynecological outpatient clinic, the Department of Obstetrics and Gynecology, Gødstrup Hospital, Denmark. Women of childbearing age undergoing active surveillance with colposcopy, biopsy and smear every 6 months due to CIN2 were eligible for enrollment. In-depth semi-structured interviews were conducted. The interviews were audiotaped and transcribed verbatim. A thematic analysis was performed using a phenomenological approach.

RESULTS

A total of 20 women were included. All women experienced nervousness and anxiety when they were diagnosed with CIN2 initially. Their main concern was whether they had cancer. Most women carried on with their everyday lives with only minor occasional worries about CIN2, often prompted just before check-up. However, some women were particularly nervous and found the period between check-ups frustrating and challenging. Women did not want to postpone their plans for pregnancy because of CIN2, but experienced the worries and check-ups associated with active surveillance as disruptive elements in their family planning. Women preparing for fertility treatment had their startup unnecessarily delayed due to active surveillance of CIN2, as clinical guidelines were inconsistent across subspecialties. Various factors influenced women's emotional well-being: life circumstances, information needs, and mental and physical discomfort during colposcopic examination.

CONCLUSIONS

Women felt that worries and check-ups due to active surveillance of CIN2 were disrupting elements in their family planning, although they did not affect their every-day life. Some women, however, were particularly anxious, demonstrating the importance of including women's experiences and preferences in clinical counseling. The fact that fertility treatment was delayed due inconsistent guidelines across subspecialties, suggests a need for a revision of current guidelines.

Trends in surgical treatment of early-stage breast cancer reveal decreasing mastectomy use between 2003 and 2016 by age, race, and rurality

PURPOSE

To examine trends in the surgical treatment of breast cancer by age, rurality, and among Black women in a populous, racially diverse, state in the Southeastern United States of America.

METHODS

We identified women diagnosed with localized or regional breast cancer between 2003 and 2016 in the North Carolina Central Cancer Registry (n = 86,776). Using Joinpoint regression we evaluated the average annual percentage change in proportion of women treated with mastectomy versus breast-conserving surgery overall, by age group, among Black women, and for women residing in rural areas.

RESULTS

Overall, the rate of mastectomy usage in the population declined 2.5% per year between 2003 and 2016 (95% CI - 3.2, - 1.7). Over this same time interval, breast-conserving surgery increased by 1.6% per year (95% CI 0.9, 2.2). These temporal trends in surgery were also observed among Black women and rural residing women. Trends in surgery type varied by age group: mastectomy declined over time among women > 50 years, but not among women aged 18-49 at diagnosis.

DISCUSSION

In contrast to national studies that reported increasing use of mastectomy, we found declining mastectomy rates in the early 2000s in a Southern US state with a racially and geographically diverse population. These decreasing trends were consistent among key subgroups affected by cancer inequities, including Black and White rural women.

HIV risk management among sexual minority men in China: context, lived experience, and implications for pre-exposure prophylaxis implementation

This study examined the social context and lived experience of HIV risk management among sexual minority men in China. An interpretative phenomenological analysis of 25 in-depth interviews with participants in five Chinese cities was undertaken. Findings show how men managed HIV risk in the context of high risk perception and anxiety, and strong perceived social discrimination and marginalisation. Men's choice of risk management strategies was influenced by their often-negative perceptions of gay community, social norms around condom use, and prior lived experience. Results underscore the importance of considering these contexts when planning pre-exposure prophylaxis (PrEP) implementation in China and highlight the need for strategies to address potential PrEP-related stigma among sexual minority men.

Experiences with information provision and preferences for decision making of patients with acute stroke

OBJECTIVE

The aim of this study was to gain insight into experiences of patients with acute stroke regarding information provision and their preferred involvement in decision-making processes during the initial period of hospitalisation.

METHODS

A sequential explanatory design was used in two independent cohorts of patients with stroke, starting with a survey after discharge from hospital (cohort 1) followed by observations and structured interviews during hospitalisation (cohort 2). Quantitative data were analysed descriptively.

RESULTS

In total, 72 patients participated in this study (52 in cohort 1 and 20 in cohort 2). During hospitalisation, the majority of the patients were educated about acute stroke and their treatment. Approximately half of the patients preferred to have an active role in the decision-making process, whereas only 21% reported to be actively involved. In cohort 2, 60% of the patients considered themselves capable to carefully consider treatment options.

CONCLUSIONS

Active involvement in the acute decision-making process is preferred by approximately half of the patients with acute stroke and most of them consider themselves capable of doing so. However, they experience a limited degree of actual involvement.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS

Physicians can facilitate patient engagement by explicitly emphasising when a decision has to be made in which the patient's opinion is important.

Delivering patient-centered care through shared decision making in overactive bladder

Introduction

Men and women living with overactive bladder (OAB) face many treatment decisions as they progress through the treatment pathway. Decisions to pursue specific therapies are highly preference sensitive and ideal for shared decision making (SDM). The aim of this narrative review is to provide urologists with a practical summary of methods to elicit preferences and facilitate SDM to promote patient‐centered care for OAB.

Methods

We explore OAB as a preference sensitive condition through a review of treatment outcomes and present available data on prediction tools, patient preferences, and decision aids. We propose a paradigm for applying Everyday SDM to OAB care.

Results

Clinical outcome data points to equipoise (balanced outcomes) between options for first‐, second‐, and third‐line OAB therapies, making OAB preference sensitive and appropriate for SDM. Methods to personalize care through individualized outcome prediction calculators and tools to elicit patient preferences are emerging. While patient information about OAB is readily available, we identified few OAB decision aids that facilitate patient preference elicitation and SDM.

Conclusions

OAB is a preference sensitive condition, where treatment is largely based on the patient's preferences and values. SDM is an ideal approach to supporting patients through these treatment decisions. We propose the application of Everyday SDM, a personalized, clinically efficient methodology as a method to support patient‐centered OAB care.

Different patients, different preferences: A multicenter assessment of patients' personality traits and anxiety in shared decision making

OBJECTIVE

Patient-centered care and shared decision making (SDM) are generally recognized as the gold standard for medical consultations, especially for preference-sensitive decisions. However, little is known about psychological patient characteristics that influence patient-reported preferences. We set out to explore the role of personality and anxiety for a preference-sensitive decision in bladder cancer patients (choice of urinary diversion, UD) and to determine if anxiety predicts patients' participation preferences.

METHODS

We recruited a sample of bladder cancer patients (N = 180, primarily male, retired) who awaited a medical consultation on radical cystectomy and their choice of UD. We asked patients to fill in a set of self-report questionnaires before this consultation, including measures of treatment preference, personality (BFI-10), anxiety (STAI), and participation preference (API and API-Uro), as well as sociodemographic characteristics.

RESULTS

Most patients (79%) indicated a clear preference for one of the treatment options (44% continent UD, 34% incontinent UD). Patients who reported more conscientiousness were more likely to prefer more complex methods (continent UD). The majority (62%) preferred to delegate decision making to healthcare professionals. A substantial number of patients reported elevated anxiety (32%), and more anxiety was predictive of higher participation preference, specifically for uro-oncological decisions (β = 0.207, p < 0.01).

CONCLUSIONS

Our findings provide insight into the role of psychological patient characteristics for SDM. Aspects of personality such as conscientiousness influence treatment preferences. Anxiety contributes to patients' motivation to be involved in pertinent decisions. Thus, personality and negative affect should be considered to improve SDM.

An Objective Measure of Decisional Clarity to Assess Decision Aid Effectiveness in Situations with Equipoise: A Randomized Trial

BACKGROUND

Decision aids can help patients make medical decisions, which is especially advantageous in situations with equipoise. However, when there is no correct answer, it is difficult to assess whether a decision aid is helpful. The goal of this research is to propose and validate an objective method for measuring decision aid effectiveness by quantifying the clarity participants achieved when making decisions.

DESIGN

The measure of decisional clarity was tested in a convenience sample of 131 college-aged students making hypothetical decisions about 2 treatment options for depression and anxiety. The treatments varied with respect to potential benefits and harms. Information was presented numerically or with an accompanying data visualization (an icon array) that is known to aid decision making.

RESULTS

Decisional clarity was better with the icon arrays. Furthermore, the results showed that decisional clarity can be used to identify situations for which patients will be more likely to struggle making their decision. These included situations for which financial considerations were relevant to the decision and situations for which the probabilities of potential benefits were higher.

LIMITATIONS

The measure of decisional clarity and the situations identified as lacking clarity should be validated with a larger, more representative sample.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings demonstrate that decisional clarity can be used to both empirically evaluate the effectiveness of a decision aid as well as test factors that can cloud clarity and disrupt medical decision making.

IMPLICATIONS

Researchers and medical providers interested in developing decision aids for situations with equipoise can use decisional clarity as an objective measure to assess the effectiveness of their decision aid. Financial considerations and higher probabilities may also cloud judgments.

HIGHLIGHTS

An objective measure of decisional clarity is supported.Decisional clarity can be used to evaluate decision aids in the context of equipoise for which there is no objectively correct choice.Decisional clarity can also be used to identify scenarios for which patients are likely to struggle to make a medical decision.

Exploring the Key Factors of Shared Decision-Making Through an Influential Network Relation Map: The Orthopedic Nurse's Perspective

BACKGROUND

Few studies have used quantitative methods to explore the key factors affecting shared decision-making (SDM) in nursing decision-making from the perspective of orthopedic nurses.

PURPOSE

To understand the intercorrelations among shared decision-making questionnaire-nurse (SDM-Q-NUR) factors and identify key factors for clinical nursing care decisions in orthopedics.

METHODS

In May 2021, this study investigated the interdependence of the SDM-Q-NUR scale and developed an influential network-relation map (INRM) from the clinical experience of 13 trained orthopedic nurses using the Decision-making Trial and Evaluation Laboratory method.

RESULTS

The INRM results showed that the nine criteria corresponded to three stages: preparation, discussion, and decision. "I helped my patient or patient's family understand all the information" (C 5) and "I wanted to know from my patient or patient's family how they want to be involved in making the nursing care decision" (C 2) are the main key factors for the beginning of nursing decision. In the discussion and decision stages, the corresponding key factors are "I made it clear to my patient or patient's family that a nursing care decision needs to be made" (C 1) and "I asked my patient or patient's family which nursing care option they prefer" (C 6). The result's statistical significance confidence and gap error were 98.106% and 1.894%, respectively.

CONCLUSIONS

When making nursing decisions with patients, orthopedic nurses need to have detailed information about how patients are involved in SDM and all relevant information. Nurses should also inform patients and their families regarding the purpose of the discussion, namely, to help one understand the content, advantages, and disadvantages of the nursing care options, and finally, make a decision.

One Fraction Size Does Not Fit All: Patient Preferences for Hypofractionated Radiation Therapy From a Discrete Choice Experiment

PURPOSE

Hypofractionated external beam radiation therapy (EBRT) is a standard of care option for localized prostate cancer. To inform clinical practice we quantified patients' preferences for convenience, efficacy, and toxicity risks, of conventional, moderate hypofractionation, and stereotactic radiation therapy regimens.

METHODS AND MATERIALS

We used a discrete choice experiment with a voluntary sample consisting of patients treated with EBRT for localized prostate cancer at our academic cancer center. In 2019, 58 participants, mean (SD) age of 72.9 (7.1) years, agreed to complete an in-person 1:1 discrete choice experiment. Each participant made 12 choices between 2 unique EBRT scenarios, each described by 5 attributes: (1) treatment time; (2) fiducial markers; and risk of (3) prostate specific antigen recurrence; (4) acute and (5) late GI or GU toxicity. Patient preferences were estimated using mixed multinomial logistic regression, and prespecified subgroups with conditional logistic regression.

RESULTS

All attributes were statistically significant, thus influenced participants' choices. Risks of prostate specific antigen recurrence (β = -2.581), late (β = -1.854), and acute (β = -1.005) toxicity were most important to participants (P < .001 for each), followed by EBRT length (β = -0.728; P = .017) and fiducial marker implantation (β = -0.563; P = .004). Older (β = -0.063; 95% confidence interval, -0.12, -0.01) and rural (β = -0.083; 95% CI -0.14, -0.02) participants significantly preferred shorter EBRT and were less willing-to-extend treatment to reduce toxicity risk.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients with prostate cancer place importance on EBRT attributes, and some are willing to trade-off increased risk of toxicity for improved convenience. Our findings promote shared clinical decision-making because patients are interested in learning about the trade-offs involved.

An absence of equipoise: Examining surgeons' decision talk during encounters with women considering breast cancer surgery

Shared decision-making is recommended for decisions with multiple reasonable options, yet clinicians often subtly or explicitly guide choices. Using purposive sampling, we performed a secondary analysis of 142 audio-recorded encounters between 13 surgeons and women eligible for breast-conserving surgery with radiation or mastectomy. We trained 9 surgeons in shared decision-making and provided them one of two conversation aids; 4 surgeons practiced as usual. Based on a published taxonomy of treatment recommendations (pronouncements, suggestions, proposals, offers, assertions), we examined how surgeons framed choices with patients. Many surgeons made assertions providing information and advice (usual care 71% vs. intervention 66%; p = 0.54). Some made strong pronouncements (usual care 51% vs. intervention 36%; p = .09). Few made proposals and offers, leaving the door open for deliberation (proposals usual care 21% vs. intervention 26%; p = 0.51; offers usual care 40% vs. intervention 40%; p = 0.98). Surgeons were significantly more likely to describe options as comparable when using a conversation aid, mentioning this in all intervention group encounters (usual care 64% vs. intervention 100%; p<0.001). Conversation aids can facilitate offers of comparable options, but other conversational actions can inhibit aspects of shared decision-making.

The impact of patient narratives on medical students' perceptions of shared decision making: A randomized controlled trial

Successful shared decision making (SDM) in clinical practice requires that future clinicians learn to appreciate the value of patient participation as early as they can in their medical training. Narratives, such as patient testimonials, have been successfully used to support patients' decision-making process. Previous research suggests that narratives may also be used for increasing clinicians' empathy and responsiveness in medical consultations. However, so far, no studies have investigated the benefits of narratives for conveying the relevance of SDM to medical students. In this randomized controlled experiment, N = 167 medical students were put into a scenario where they prepared for medical consultation with a patient having Parkinson disease. After receiving general information, participants read either a narrative testimonial of a Parkinson patient or a fact-based information text. We measured their perceptions of SDM, their control preferences (i.e., their priorities as to who should make the decision), and the time they intended to spend for the consultation. Participants in the narrative patient testimonial condition referred more strongly to the patient as the one who should make decisions than participants who read the information text. Participants who read the patient narrative also considered SDM in situations with several equivalent treatment options to be more important than participants in the information text condition. There were no group differences regarding their control preferences. Participants who read the patient testimonial indicated that they would schedule more time for the consultation. These findings show that narratives can potentially be useful for imparting the relevance of SDM and patient-centered values to medical students. We discuss possible causes of this effect and implications for training and future research. Trial registration: The study was pre-registered on the pre-registration platform AsPredicted (aspredicted.org) before data collection began (registration number: #29,342). Date of registration: 17 October 2019.

The ethical dilemma of emergency department patients with low-risk chest pain

Millions of patients present to US EDs each year with symptoms concerning for acute coronary syndrome (ACS), but fewer than 10% are ultimately diagnosed with ACS. Well-tested and externally validated accelerated diagnostic protocols were developed to aid providers in risk stratifying patients with possible ACS and have become central components of current ED practice guidelines. Nevertheless, the fear of missing ACS continues to be a strong motivator for ED providers to pursue further testing for their patients. An ethical dilemma arises when the provider must balance the risk of ACS if the patient is discharged compared with the potential harms caused by a cardiac workup. Providers should be familiar with the ethical principles relevant to this dilemma in order to determine what is in the best interests of the patient.

Role of GPs in shared decision making with patients about palliative cancer treatment: a qualitative study in the Netherlands

Background

GPs are well placed to enhance shared decision making (SDM) about treatment for patients with advanced cancer. However, to date, little is known about GPs’ views about their contribution to SDM.

Aim

To explore GPs’ perspectives on their role in SDM about palliative cancer treatment and the requirements they report to fulfil this role.

Design and setting

Qualitative interview study among Dutch GPs.

Method

GPs were sampled purposefully and conveniently. In-depth, semi-structured interviews were conducted, recorded, and transcribed verbatim. Transcripts were analysed by thematic analysis.

Results

Fifteen GPs took part in this study. Most of them reported practices that potentially support SDM: checking the quality of a decision, complementing SDM, and enabling SDM. Even though most of the GPs believed that decision making about systemic cancer treatment is primarily the oncologist’s responsibility, they did recognise their added value in the SDM process because of their gatekeeper position, the additional opportunity they offer patients to discuss treatment decisions, and their knowledge and experience as primary healthcare providers at the end of life. Requirements for them to support the SDM process were described as: good collaboration with oncologists; sufficient information about the disease and its treatment; time to engage in conversations about treatment; a trusting relationship with patients; and patient-centred communication.

Conclusion

GPs may support SDM by checking the quality of a decision and by complementing and enabling the SDM process to reach high-quality decisions. This conceptualisation of the GP’s supporting role in SDM may help us to understand how SDM is carried out through interprofessional collaboration and provide tools for how to adopt a role in the interprofessional SDM process.

Co-production of randomized clinical trials with patients: a case study in autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant for patients with scleroderma

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, it is argued that clinical trials struggle to recruit participants because they do not respond to key questions or study treatments that patients will be willing or able to use. This study explores how elicitation of patient-preferences can help designers of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) understand the impact of changing modifiable aspects of treatments or trial design on recruitment.

METHODS

Focus groups and a discrete choice experiment (DCE) survey were used to elicit preferences of people with scleroderma for autologous hematopoietic stem cell transplant (AHSCT) treatment interventions. Preferences for seven attributes of treatment (effectiveness, immediate and long-term risk, care team composition and experience, cost, travel distance) were estimated using a mixed-logit model and used to predict participation in RCTs.

RESULTS

Two hundred seventy-eight people with scleroderma answered the survey. All AHSCT treatment attributes significantly influenced preferences. Treatment effectiveness and risk of late complications contributed the most to participants' choices, but modifiable factors of distance to treatment center and cost also affected preferences. Predicted recruitment rates calibrated with participation in a recent trial (33%) and suggest offering a treatment closer to home, at lower patient cost, and with holistic, multidisciplinary care could increase participation to 51%.

CONCLUSIONS

Through a patient engaged approach to preference elicitation for different features of AHSCT treatment options, we were able to predict what drives the decisions of people with scleroderma to participate in RCTs. Knowledge regarding concerns and the trade-offs people are willing to make can inform clinical study design, improving recruitment rates and potential uptake of the treatment of interest.

Decision-making following identification of an infant's unilateral hearing loss: Parent and professional perspectives

BACKGROUND

Parents of infants identified with unilateral hearing loss (UHL) make decisions about managing their infant's hearing loss based on limited evidence and before knowing whether their infant will require additional support.

OBJECTIVES

The decision-making processes of parents and clinicians regarding the management of UHL following newborn hearing screening were examined.

PROCEDURE

Two convenience samples were recruited: 15 parents of children with permanent UHL aged under 4 years, and 14 clinicians. Applied thematic analysis of the semi-structured interviews elicited insight into the complexities surrounding decision-making from a parent and clinician perspective.

RESULTS

Three main themes captured the decision-making process: motivation for decision-making, limited evidence creates uncertainty, and available evidence builds certainty. The diverse experiences and opinions of parents and clinicians highlight the complexity of decision-making when there are contested opinions and no clear best management option.

CONCLUSIONS

The choices parents make about the management of their child's UHL can have lifelong implications for their child. Many questions need answering before parents can effectively evaluate the short- and long-term consequences of their options and whether the advantages outweigh the disadvantages in the long-term. This uncertainty is challenging for professionals and parents and risks cognitive biases influencing clinical and parental decision-making.

Understanding Attributes that Influence Physician and Caregiver Decisions About Neurotechnology for Pediatric Drug-Resistant Epilepsy: A Formative Qualitative Study to Support the Development of a Discrete Choice Experiment

OBJECTIVE

This study reports formative qualitative research used to analyze decision making regarding neurotechnological interventions for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy from the perspective of physicians and caregivers and the derivation of attributes for a discrete choice experiment.

METHODS

Purposive and convenience sampling was used to recruit physicians and caregivers. Physician focus group sessions were held at key national conferences in the USA and Canada. Caregivers were approached through clinics with established epilepsy surgery programs in the USA and Canada. Thematic analysis was used to identify critical features of decisions about treatment outcomes, procedural trade-offs, values, and concerns surrounding conventional and novel pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy interventions among physicians and caregivers.

RESULTS

The results highlight the presence of central attributes that are considered by both groups in decision making, such as "chances of seizure freedom", "risk", "availability of evidence", and "cost to families", as well as attributes that reflect important differences between groups. Physicians were focused on the specifics of treatment options, while caregivers thought more holistically, considering the overall well-being of their children.

DISCUSSION

The findings shaped the development of a discrete choice experiment to understand the likely uptake of different neurotechnologies. We identified differences in decision making and thus designed two discrete choice experiments to elicit preferences for pediatric drug-resistant epilepsy treatments, one aimed at clinicians and one at caregivers. The variation we observed highlights the value of seeking to understand the influences at the point of clinical decision making and incorporating this information into care.

Evaluating shared decision-making between companion animal veterinarians and their clients using the Observer OPTION5 instrument

BACKGROUND

Communication practices used by veterinarians can impact client's involvement in decision-making. The objective of this study was to evaluate the level of client involvement in veterinary care decisions and factors impacting client involvement.

METHODS

A random sample of practising companion animal veterinarians and a convenience sample of pet owners were recruited. Each consultation was audio-video recorded and analyzed using the Observer OPTION⁵ instrument, adapted from human medicine, to assess veterinarians' level of shared decision-making. A mixed linear model was used to assess statistical associations between veterinarian, client and appointment-level factors and OPTION⁵ scores.

RESULTS

Sixty veterinarians and 909 of their clients were audio-video recorded during a consultation, of which 717 interactions included a decision identified for analysis using the OPTION⁵ instrument. Elements consistent with shared decision-making were uncommon, with a mean OPTION⁵ score of 22.6 (median = 20.0; sd = 13.05; range = 0-75) out of 100. OPTION⁵ scores were positively associated with the length of the appointment and negatively associated with the veterinarian's years in practice when controlling for statistical interaction between client income and appointment type.

CONCLUSION

Findings suggest an opportunity exists for veterinarians to incorporate more client involvement through increased use of shared decision-making behaviours during veterinary consultations.