RESUMEN

AIM: To explore the associations between depression, anxiety, decisional conflict and advance care planning engagement and the potential mediating role of decisional conflict in the associations between depression, anxiety and advance care planning among community-dwelling older adults. DESIGN: A cross-sectional study was conducted with 262 community-dwelling older Australians across metropolitan, regional and rural communities between August and October 2022. METHODS: Validated self-reported questions were used to collect data on anxiety, depression (Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale), decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale), advance care planning engagement (Advance Care Planning Engagement Survey) and covariates (demographic characteristics, health literacy [Health Literacy Screening Questions]), overall health status (Short form 36). Data analysis included descriptive statistics, bivariate association analysis, general linear modelling and path analysis. RESULTS: Anxiety and decisional conflict were directly associated with advance care planning engagement even after controlling for potential effects of demographic characteristics, health literacy and overall health status. The model, including age, gender, country of birth, language spoken at home, education, overall health status, anxiety, depression, decisional conflict and interaction between anxiety and decisional conflict, explained 24.3% of the variance in their advance care planning engagement. Decisional conflict mediated the association between anxiety and advance care planning engagement. CONCLUSION: Increased anxiety and decisional conflict were associated with reduced advance care planning engagement directly, even among community-dwelling older adults with higher levels of education and health literacy. Increased anxiety was associated with reduced advance care planning engagement indirectly via increased decisional conflict. Healthcare professionals should assess community-dwelling older adults' anxiety and implement interventions to manage their anxiety and decisional conflict, as these may facilitate their engagement in advance care planning. IMPACT: Understanding factors associated with advance care planning engagement among community-dwelling older adults may inform strategies facilitating their future engagement in advance care planning. Findings from this study may be used as evidence for future implementation to facilitate the engagement of community-dwelling older adults in advance care planning. REPORTING METHOD: The STROBE statement checklist was used as a guide to writing the manuscript. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The study was advertised publicly through social media (e.g. Twitter and Facebook) and newsletters (e.g. Advance Care Planning Australia, Centre for Volunteering, Palliative Care Australia and a large home care service provider with approximately 7000 older clients receiving support or services) to recruit participants. People aged 65 years and older living independently in the Australian community who could communicate in English were invited to participate and answer the questionnaire.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Advances in emergency and critical care have improved outcomes, but gaps in communication and decision-making persist, especially in the emergency department (ED), prompting the development of a checklist to aid in serious illness conversations (SIC) in China. METHODS: This was a single-centre prospective interventional study on the quality improvement of SIC for life-sustaining treatment (LST). The study recruited patients consecutively for both its observational baseline and interventional stages until its conclusion. Eligible participants were adults over 18 years old admitted to the Emergency Intensive Care Unit (EICU) of a tertiary teaching hospital, possessing full decisional capacity or having a legal proxy. Exclusions were made for pregnant women, patients deceased upon arrival, those who refused participation, and individuals with incomplete data for analysis. First, a two-round Delphi process was organized to identify major elements and generate a standard process through a checklist. Subsequently, the efficacy of SIC in adult patients admitted to the EICU was compared using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) score before (baseline group) and after (intervention group) implementing the checklist. RESULTS: The study participants presented with the most common comorbidities, such as diabetes, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular disease, moderate-to-severe renal disease, congestive heart failure, and chronic pulmonary disease. The median Charlson Index did not differ between the baseline and intervention cohorts. The median length of hospital stay was 11.0 days, and 82.9% of patients survived until hospital discharge. The total DCS score was lower in the intervention group than in the baseline group. Three subscales, including the informed, values clarity, and support subscales, demonstrated significant differences between the intervention and baseline groups. Fewer intervention group patients agreed with and changed their minds about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) compared to the baseline group. CONCLUSION: The use of a SIC checklist in the EICU reduced the DCS score by increasing medical information disclosure, patient value awareness, and decision-making support.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Understanding the prenatal screening and diagnostic tests performed during pregnancy and making a decision in line with the test results can be a complex process for pregnant individuals and their families. Therefore, this study examined pregnant individuals' genetic literacy and decisional conflict regarding prenatal screening tests. The study was conducted with 328 pregnant individuals who applied to a training and research hospital to receive antenatal care between April 05 and September 30, 2021. Research data were collected by using the "Decisional Conflict Scale," "SURE Scale," and "Genetic Literacy and Comprehension Measure." The mean age of the participants was 28.69 ± 5.48, and the mean gestational week was 25.90 ± 10.43. A statistically significant difference was found between the educational levels of the pregnant individuals and the genetic literacy and comprehension scales (p < 0.001). A statistically significant difference was found between getting information about prenatal screening tests, having a screening test and decisional conflict scale, SURE Scale, and genetic literacy and comprehension scales (p < 0.001). A weak, negative, statistically significant correlation was found between the genetic literacy and comprehension familiarity and decision conflict scales (r = -0.177, p = 0.001). It is well known that pregnant individuals have difficulty understanding and interpreting test results due to prenatal screening tests that include genetic information. In our study, approximately half of the pregnant individuals received information about prenatal screening tests. Therefore, prenatal care must include the necessary information about prenatal screening tests. The study found that as the genetic literacy of pregnant individuals increased, the conflict of decisions they experienced decreased. Accordingly, it is suggested that interventions to increase genetic literacy among pregnant individuals may be effective in reducing decisional conflict regarding prenatal screening tests.

RESUMEN

STUDY QUESTION: Does a purpose-designed Decision Aid for women considering elective egg freezing (EEF) impact decisional conflict and other decision-related outcomes? SUMMARY ANSWER: The Decision Aid reduces decisional conflict, prepares women for decision-making, and does not cause distress. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: Elective egg-freezing decisions are complex, with 78% of women reporting high decisional conflict. Decision Aids are used to support complex health decisions. We developed an online Decision Aid for women considering EEF and demonstrated that it was acceptable and useful in Phase 1 testing. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: A single-blind, two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial was carried out. Target sample size was 286 participants. Randomization was 1:1 to the control (existing website information) or intervention (Decision Aid plus existing website information) group and stratified by Australian state/territory and prior IVF specialist consultation. Participants were recruited between September 2020 and March 2021 with outcomes recorded over 12 months. Data were collected using online surveys and data collection was completed in March 2022. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Females aged ≥18 years, living in Australia, considering EEF, proficient in English, and with internet access were recruited using multiple methods including social media posts, Google advertising, newsletter/noticeboard posts, and fertility clinic promotion. After completing the baseline survey, participants were emailed their allocated website link(s). Follow-up surveys were sent at 6 and 12 months. Primary outcome was decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale). Other outcomes included distress (Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale), knowledge about egg freezing and female age-related infertility (study-specific measure), whether a decision was made, preparedness to decide about egg freezing (Preparation for Decision-Making Scale), informed choice (Multi-Dimensional Measure of Informed Choice), and decision regret (Decision Regret Scale). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Overall, 306 participants (mean age 30 years; SD: 5.2) were randomized (intervention n = 150, control n = 156). Decisional Conflict Scale scores were significantly lower at 12 months (mean score difference: -6.99 [95% CI: -12.96, -1.02], P = 0.022) for the intervention versus control group after adjusting for baseline decisional conflict. At 6 months, the intervention group felt significantly more prepared to decide about EEF than the control (mean score difference: 9.22 [95% CI: 2.35, 16.08], P = 0.009). At 12 months, no group differences were observed in distress (mean score difference: 0.61 [95% CI: -3.72, 4.93], P = 0.783), knowledge (mean score difference: 0.23 [95% CI: -0.21, 0.66], P = 0.309), or whether a decision was made (relative risk: 1.21 [95% CI: 0.90, 1.64], P = 0.212). No group differences were found in informed choice (relative risk: 1.00 [95% CI: 0.81, 1.25], P = 0.983) or decision regret (median score difference: -5.00 [95% CI: -15.30, 5.30], P = 0.337) amongst participants who had decided about EEF by 12 months (intervention n = 48, control n = 45). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: Unknown participant uptake and potential sampling bias due to the recruitment methods used and restrictions caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Some outcomes had small sample sizes limiting the inferences made. The use of study-specific or adapted validated measures may impact the reliability of some results. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: This is the first randomized controlled trial to evaluate a Decision Aid for EEF. The Decision Aid reduced decisional conflict and improved women's preparation for decision making. The tool will be made publicly available and can be tailored for international use. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The Decision Aid was developed with funding from the Royal Women's Hospital Foundation and McBain Family Trust. The study was funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Project Grant APP1163202, awarded to M. Hickey, M. Peate, R.J. Norman, and R. Hart (2019-2021). S.S., M.P., D.K., and S.B. were supported by the NHMRC Project Grant APP1163202 to perform this work. R.H. is Medical Director of Fertility Specialists of Western Australia and National Medical Director of City Fertility. He has received grants from MSD, Merck-Serono, and Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study and is a shareholder of CHA-SMG. R.L. is Director of Women's Health Melbourne (Medical Practice), ANZSREI Executive Secretary (Honorary), RANZCOG CREI Subspecialty Committee Member (Honorary), and a Fertility Specialist at Life Fertility Clinic Melbourne and Royal Women's Hospital Public Fertility Service. R.A.A. has received grants from Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study. M.H., K.H., and R.J.N. have no conflicts to declare. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620001032943. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 11 August 2020. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 29 September 2020.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Nearly 40% of unplanned pregnancies in the USA are the result of inconsistent or incorrect contraceptive use. Finding ways to increase women's comfort and satisfaction with contraceptive use is therefore critical to public health. One promising pathway for improving patient outcomes is through the use of digital decision aids that assist women and their physicians in choosing a contraceptive option that women are comfortable with. Testing the ability of these aids to improve patient outcomes is therefore a necessary first step toward incorporating this technology into traditional physician appointments. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a novel contraceptive decision aid at minimizing decisional conflict and increasing comfort with contraception among adult women. METHODS: In total, 310 adult women were assigned to use either the Tuune contraceptive decision aid or a control aid modeled after a leading online contraceptive prescriber's patient intake form. Participants then completed self-report measures of decisional conflict, contraceptive expectations, satisfaction, and contraceptive use intentions. Individual between-subjects analysis of variance (ANOVA) models were used to examine these outcomes. RESULTS: Women using the Tuune decision aid (vs. those using the control aid) reported lower decisional conflict, more positive contraceptive expectations, greater satisfaction with the decision aid and recommendation, and more positive contraceptive use intentions. CONCLUSIONS: Use of Tuune improved each of the predicted patient outcomes relative to a control decision aid. Online decision aids, particularly when used alongside physician consultations, may be an effective tool for increasing comfort with contraceptive use. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION #: NCT05177783, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05177783.

Digital decision aids that help women and their physicians choose contraceptive options that women are most comfortable with present one promising way to improve contraceptive use outcomes, such as avoiding unplanned pregnancies. However, current decision aids have been found to struggle in helping improve women's satisfaction with and confidence in their contraceptive choices. The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of a new digital decision aid, named Tuune, at helping improve women's confidence and comfort with contraception. Three hundred and ten adult women were randomly assigned to use and then receive a contraceptive recommendation from either the Tuune decision aid or a control aid designed after leading traditional health intake forms. Women's confidence and satisfaction with the aids, as well as their contraceptive recommendation, were then compared between groups. We found good evidence to suggest that women using the Tuune contraceptive decision aid were more satisfied and positive about their contraceptive choices and reported greater intentions to use contraception with increased confidence compared to women who used the control decision aid. New online decision aids, like Tuune, may be an effective tool for increasing women's comfort and experiences using contraception.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Purpose: Shared decision-making is critical in multiple sclerosis (MS) due to the uncertainty of the disease trajectory over time and the large number of treatment options with differing efficacy, safety and administration characteristics. The aim of this study was to assess patients' decisional conflict regarding the choice of a disease-modifying therapy and its associated factors in patients with mid-stage relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis (RRMS). Methods: A multicenter, non-interventional study was conducted. Adult patients with a diagnosis of RRMS (2017 revised McDonald criteria) and disease duration of 3 to 8 years were included. The level of uncertainty experienced by a patient when faced with making a treatment choice was assessed using the 4-item Decisional Conflict Scale. A battery of patient-reported and clinician-rated measures was administered to obtain information on symptom severity, illness perception, illness-related uncertainty, regret, MS knowledge, risk taking behavior, preferred role in the decision-making process, cognition, and self-management. Patients were recruited during routine follow-up visits and completed all questionnaires online using electronic tablets at the hospital. A multivariate logistic regression analysis was conducted. Results: A total of 201 patients were studied. Mean age (Standard deviation) was 38.7 (8.4) years and 74.1% were female. Median disease duration (Interquartile range) was 6.0 (4.0-7.0) years. Median EDSS score was 1.0 (0-2.0). Sixty-seven (33.3%) patients reported a decisional conflict. These patients had lower MS knowledge and more illness uncertainty, anxiety, depressive symptoms, fatigue, subjective symptom severity, a threatening illness perception, and poorer quality of life than their counterparts. Lack of decisional conflict was associated with MS knowledge (Odds ratio [OR]=1.195, 95% CI 1.045, 1.383, p=0.013), self-management (OR=1.049, 95% CI 1.013, 1.093, p=0.018), and regret after a healthcare decision (OR=0.860, 95% CI 0.756, 0.973, p=0.018) in the multivariate analysis. Conclusion: Decisional conflict regarding the selection of a disease-modifying therapy was a common phenomenon in patients with mid-stage RRMS. Identifying factors associated with decisional conflict may be useful to implement preventive strategies that help patients better understand their condition and strengthen their self-management resources.

RESUMEN

INTRODUCTION: Older patients with cancer are less likely to express their treatment preferences than younger patients. Question prompt lists (QPLs) facilitate communication between patients and physicians. Geriatric assessment (GA) is recommended when older patients with cancer make treatment decisions. This study estimated the effect size of a shared decision-making (SDM) support program combining QPLs with GA in terms of patients' subjective evaluation of the SDM process for a future definitive randomized controlled trial. We also evaluated the number and quality of aging-related communication during consultations, and feasibility and acceptability of the study for exploratory purposes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a pilot study with randomized allocation and blind evaluation. Patients aged 65 years or older at the National Cancer Center Hospital, Tokyo, Japan, scheduled to discuss the changes of their treatment, were randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio to the SDM support program or usual care. This program consisted of 30-60 min of face-to-face coaching, with QPLs and GA provided before the coaching. As the primary endpoint, the decisional conflict scores given by the patients immediately after the consultation were compared between the two groups. For the secondary endpoints, the number and quality of aging-related communications during the consultations were assessed by evaluators (blinded) using audio-recordings. Adherence, burden, and usefulness were assessed for evaluating feasibility and acceptability of the SDM support program. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled. All patients completed the GA questionnaire, for which 70% did not require any individual assistance. Answering the questionnaires took approximately 11 min. The decisional conflict scores were mean [standard deviation (SD)]: 19.3 [10.8] vs. 18.0 [11.1] (effect size: Cohen's d = 0.12) for the SDM support program and usual care groups, respectively. The number of aging-related communications during the consultation for the new treatment was higher in the SDM support program group than the usual care (mean [SD]: 3.3 [1.2] vs. 2.2 [1.5], effect size: cohen's d = 1.32). Patients felt that the SDM support program was useful but not burdensome or difficult. DISCUSSION: The SDM support program was considered useful and feasible for older patients and able to facilitate communication regarding aging-related concerns. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: The study protocol was registered on September 23, 2020, in the UMIN Clinical Trials Registry (UMIN000041867).

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To assess the psychometric properties, i.e., reliability and construct validity of the 16-item Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and sub-scales in women with perinatal depressive symptoms in Norway and Portugal. METHODS: We included 415 women in Portugal and 163 in Norway (≥18 years) who were pregnant or had given birth in the last 12 months and presenting with active depressive symptoms. Women replied to the original DCS items. We conducted confirmatory factor analysis, estimated internal consistency reliability, and examined factorial invariance across country, perinatal status, and treatment uptake. RESULTS: The DCS factor model had good fit to the data, with all items loading significantly on their respective factor (.585 to .958). There was configural invariance of the DCS across countries, treatment, and perinatal status. The internal consistency of the total DCS (Cronbach's alpha) was .958, and for the subscales it ranged from .798 to .947. CONCLUSIONS: The DCS is a valid and reliable measure of the decisional conflict in women with perinatal depressive symptoms in Portugal and Norway. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Measuring the extent of decisional conflict regarding treatment and the effect of multiple interventions towards its reduction, is critical to facilitate the decision-making process of women with perinatal mental illness.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Because multiple management options exist for clinical T1 renal masses, patients may experience a state of uncertainty about the course of action to pursue (ie, decisional conflict). To better support patients, we examined patient, clinical, and decision-making factors associated with decisional conflict among patients newly diagnosed with clinical T1 renal masses suspicious for kidney cancer. MATERIALS AND METHODS: From a prospective clinical trial, participants completed the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), scored 0 to 100 with < 25 associated with implementing decisions, at 2 time points during the initial decision-making period. The trial further characterized patient demographics, health status, tumor burden, and patient-centered communication, while a subcohort completed additional questionnaires on decision-making. Associations of patient, clinical, and decision-making factors with DCS scores were evaluated using generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures per patient. RESULTS: Of 274 enrollees, 250 completed a DCS survey; 74% had masses ≤ 4 cm in size, while 11% had high-complexity tumors. Model-based estimated mean DCS score across both time points was 17.6 (95% CI 16.0-19.3), though 50% reported a DCS score ≥ 25 at least once. On multivariable analysis, DCS scores increased with age (+2.64, 95% CI 1.04-4.23), high- vs low-complexity tumors (+6.50, 95% CI 0.35-12.65), and cystic vs solid masses (+9.78, 95% CI 5.27-14.28). Among decision-making factors, DCS scores decreased with higher self-efficacy (-3.31, 95% CI -5.77 to -0.86]) and information-seeking behavior (-4.44, 95% CI -7.32 to -1.56). DCS scores decreased with higher patient-centered communication scores (-8.89, 95% CI -11.85 to -5.94). CONCLUSIONS: In addition to patient and clinical factors, decision-making factors and patient-centered communication relate with decisional conflict, highlighting potential avenues to better support patient decision-making for clinical T1 renal masses.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Informed consent for surgery can address the legal aspects of care while also being simple, informative, and empathic. We developed interactive informed consents and compared them with standard printed informed consents asking: (1) are there any factors associated with lower decision conflict or greater patient-rated clinician empathy including consent format? (2) Are there any factors associated with rating the consent process as informative, comfortable, and satisfying including consent format? METHODS: Ninety-four adult patients accepted an offer of surgery from one of three hand surgeons to address one of six common hand surgery diagnoses: carpal tunnel release, cubital tunnel release, trigger finger release, plate and screw fixation of a distal radius fracture, removal of a benign mass, including a ganglion cyst, and Dupuytren contracture release. Fifty-three patients were randomized to complete an interactive consent, and 41, a standard written consent. Symptoms of anxiety, depression, and unhelpful thoughts were measured. Patients completed the Decision Conflict Scale and the Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy and rated the consent as informative, comfortable, and satisfactory on a scale of 0-10. RESULTS: Greater decisional conflict was slightly associated with greater patient unhelpful thoughts about symptoms and was not associated with consent format. A higher rating of comfort with the consent process was slightly associated with patient choice to proceed with surgical treatment, but not with consent format. Accounting for potential confounding in multivariable analysis, a higher rating of the consent process as informative was slightly associated with patient preference for surgical over nonsurgical treatment, CONCLUSIONS: The observation that an interactive consent form was not related to decision conflict or other aspects of patient experience suggests that such tools may not have much weight relative to the interaction between patient and clinician. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Efforts to improve informed consent may need to focus on the dialog between patient and surgeon rather than how information is presented.

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Informed consent is an ethical prerequisite for psychotherapy. There are no routinely used standardized strategies for obtaining informed consent. A new optimized informed consent consultation (OIC) strengthened treatment-relevant aspects. It remains unclear which factors influence the OIC efficacy regarding clinical and decision-related outcomes. METHODS: N = 122 adults were included in a randomized controlled online trial. Participants received an information brochure on psychotherapy (TAU; n = 61) or OIC + TAU (n = 61). The main and interaction effects of group allocation, therapeutic alliance, prior knowledge about psychotherapy and treatment motivation on treatment expectations, decisional conflict and capacity to consent were tested. Floodlight analyses were conducted for significant interactions. RESULTS: Large interaction effects were shown between treatment motivation and group allocation on treatment expectations (ß = -0.53) and between prior knowledge and group assignment on capacity to consent (ß = 0.68). The interaction between treatment motivation and group allocation was significant up to a motivation score of 5.54 (range: 1-7). The interaction between prior knowledge and group assignment was significant up to a knowledge score of 14.38 (range: 5-20). CONCLUSION: Moderator analyses indicated varying efficacy degrees for the OIC regarding decisional outcomes and expectation. Especially patients with little treatment motivation or low prior knowledge benefited from optimized information about the efficacy and possible side effects of psychotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PsychArchives (https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4929): 17.06.2021.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: Human papillomavirus (HPV) poses a significant public health concern, as it is linked to various serious health conditions such as cancer and genital warts. Despite the vaccine's safety, efficacy, and availability through national school programs, HPV vaccination rates remain low in Israel, particularly within the ultra-Orthodox community due to religious and cultural barriers. Decision aids have shown promise in facilitating shared decision making and promoting informed choices in health care. This study aimed to assess the impact of a novel Web-based decision aid on HPV vaccination intentions, knowledge, decision self-efficacy, and decisional conflict among Israeli parents and young adults, with a specific focus on exploring differences between religious groups. METHODS: Two Web-based decision aids were developed for parents of children aged 10 to 17 y (n = 120) and young adults aged 18 to 26 y (n = 160). A quasi-experimental study was conducted among Hebrew-speaking parents and young adults eligible for HPV vaccination. Participants completed pre- and postintervention questionnaires assessing vaccination intentions, knowledge about HPV, decision self-efficacy, and decisional conflict. RESULTS: The decision aid significantly improved intentions toward HPV vaccination among most religious groups, except the Jewish ultra-Orthodox community. Ultra-Orthodox participants exhibited reluctance to vaccinate themselves or their children (odds ratio [OR] = 0.23, P < 0.001 for parents' group; OR = 0.43, P < 0.001 for young adults' group). Parental preference for vaccinating girls over boys (OR = 2.66, P < 0.001) and increased inclination for vaccination among Muslim-Arabs were observed (OR = 3.12, P < 0.001). Knowledge levels improved among ultra-Orthodox participants but not decisional conflict and self-efficacy. CONCLUSIONS: The Web-based decision aid positively influenced the quality of HPV vaccination decision making among various religious groups in Israel, except for the ultra-Orthodox community. Culturally tailored approaches that address specific community concerns are essential for informed decision making. HIGHLIGHTS: Human papillomavirus (HPV) vaccination rates in Israel are substantially lower than those of other routine vaccinations, particularly among religious and ultra-Orthodox communities, largely due to sociocultural beliefs and misinformation.A newly developed Web-based decision aid was implemented in a study involving parents and young adults to evaluate its impact on vaccination intent, knowledge about HPV, decision self-efficacy, and decisional conflict.While the decision aid significantly enhanced vaccination intention, knowledge, and perceived behavioral control among various religious groups, it did not yield the same outcomes within the ultra-Orthodox Jewish community.This study highlights the vital role of cultural adaptation in HPV vaccine decision aids within Israel, revealing significant disparities in vaccination perceptions and decisions among diverse religious and cultural groups.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

In times of person-centered care, it is all the more important to support patients in making good decisions about their care. One way to offer such support to patients is by way of Patient Decision Aids (PDAs). Ranging from patient brochures to web-based tools, PDAs explicitly state the decisions patients face, inform them about their medical options, help them to clarify and discuss their values, and ultimately make a decision. However, lingering discussions surround effectiveness research on PDAs. In this article, I focus on two subjective measures of decision quality that are widely used as outcome measures in effectiveness research on PDAs (i.e., the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and measures of regret). Although these measurement instruments have attracted critical attention in the scientific literature, bioethicists have hardly engaged with them. Therefore, I set myself to analyze the relationship between (the different subscales of) the DCS and measures of regret, on the one hand, and ethical principles such as beneficence and autonomy, on the other hand. In light of that analysis, I will clarify some discussions regarding the use of these measures of decision quality in effectiveness research on PDAs. This should help us to align the way we evaluate PDAs with ethical principles and avoid that our attempts to support patients in making good decisions about their care that is so central to person-centered care point in unethical directions.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: To identify factors contributing to baseline knowledge in women with BRCA1/2 pathogenic variants (PVs) and knowledge gain after decision aid (DA) use. METHODS: Women with PVs in BRCA1 or BRCA2 genes were randomly assigned to an intervention group (IG) receiving DAs or a control group (CG). Of the total sample, 417 completed the baseline survey and were included in this analysis. Two multiple regression analyses were conducted: baseline data on socio-demographic, medical, decision-related and psychological variables were used to identify predictors for (1) baseline knowledge within the total group and (2) knowledge gain within the IG after DA use three months post study inclusion. RESULTS: At baseline, higher education status, no breast cancer history, and lower decisional conflict related to higher knowledge within the total group. After DA use within the IG, higher baseline scores for decisional conflict predicted higher knowledge gain, and higher baseline scores for depression and intrusion predicted lower knowledge gain. CONCLUSIONS: This study identified predictors of baseline knowledge and knowledge gain after DA use in women with BRCA1/2 PVs. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Awareness of facilitating and hindering factors on these women's knowledge can improve understanding of their health literacy and enable further targeted support interventions.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVE: Decisional conflict is used increasingly as an outcome measure in advance care planning (ACP) studies. When the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) is used in anticipatory decision-making contexts, the scale is typically tethered to hypothetical scenarios. This study reports preliminary validation data for hypothetical scenarios relating to life-sustaining treatments and care utilisation to inform their broader use in ACP studies. METHODS: Three hypothetical scenarios were developed by a panel of multidisciplinary researchers, clinicians and community representatives. A convenience sample of 262 older adults were surveyed. Analyses investigated comprehensibility, missing data properties, sample norms, structural, convergent and discriminant validity. RESULTS: Response characteristics suggested that two of the scenarios had adequate comprehensibility and response spread. Missing response rates were unrelated to demographic characteristics. Predicted associations between DCS scores and anxiety (r's = .31-.37, p < .001), and ACP engagement (r's = -.41 to -.37, p < .001) indicated convergent validity. CONCLUSION: A substantial proportion of older adults reported clinically significant levels of decisional conflict when responding to a range of hypothetical scenarios about care or treatment. Two scenarios showed acceptable comprehensibility and response characteristics. A third scenario may be suitable following further refinement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: The scenarios tested here were designed in collaboration with a community representative and were further piloted with two groups of community members with relevant lived experiences; four people with life-limiting conditions and five current or former care partners.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

PURPOSE: Women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) face confusion and uncertainty about treatment options. The objective of this study was to determine whether there are differences in decisional conflict about treatment by age and race/ethnicity. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted of women (age ≥ 18) diagnosed with DCIS enrolled at Kaiser Permanente of Southern California. The Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) measured personal perceptions of decision uncertainty, values clarity, and effective decision-making. We used a multivariable regression to study whether age, race, and ethnicity were associated with patient-reported DCS. RESULTS: 45% (N = 1395) of women who received the online survey, participated. The mean age was 56 (± 9.6) years, the majority were white. Compared to women younger than 50, women aged 60-69 reported lower overall DCS scores (-5.4; 95% CI -1.5 to -9.3). Women > 70 had lower values clarity scores (-9.0; 95% CI -2.8 to -15.2) about their treatment compared to women aged 50-59 and 60-69 (-7.1; 95% CI -2.9 to -11.3 and - 7.2; 95% CI -2.9 to -11.5) and likewise, lower effective decision-making scores (-5.4; 95% CI -1.7 to -9.2 and - 5.2; 95% CI -1.4 to -9.0) compared to women < 50. Compared to whites, blacks reported lower decision conflict (-4.4; 95% CI 0.04 to -8.8) and lower informed decision (-5.2; 95% CI -0.18 to -10.3) about DCIS treatment. CONCLUSION: Younger women reported higher decisional conflict about DCIS treatment, compared to older women (> 70). Age based tailored discussions about treatment options, health education, and supportive decision-making interventions/tools may reduce decision conflict in future DCIS patients. TRADE REGISTRATION: The IRB number is 10678.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

OBJECTIVES: Decision-making for patients with a locally advanced laryngeal carcinoma (T3 and T4) is challenging due to the treatment choice between organ preservation and laryngectomy, both with different and high impact on function and quality of life (QoL). The complexity of these treatment decisions and their possible consequences might lead to decisional conflict (DC). This study aimed to explore the level of DC in locally advanced laryngeal carcinoma patients facing curative decision-making, and to identify possible associated factors. METHODS: In this multicenter prospective cohort study, participants completed questionnaires on DC, level of shared decision-making (SDM), and a knowledge test directly after counseling and 6 months after treatment. Descriptive statistics and Spearman correlation tests were used to analyze the data. RESULTS: Directly after counseling, almost all participants (44/45; 98%) experienced Clinically Significant DC score (CSDC >25, scale 0-100). On average, patients scored 47% (SD 20%) correct on the knowledge test. Questions related to radiotherapy were answered best (69%, SD 29%), whilst only 35% (SD 29%) of the questions related to laryngectomy were answered correctly. Patients' perceived level of SDM (scale 0-100) was 70 (mean, SD 16.2), and for physicians this was 70 (SD 1.7). CONCLUSION: Most patients with advanced larynx cancer experience high levels of DC. Low knowledge levels regarding treatment aspects indicate a need for better patient counseling. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4 Laryngoscope, 134:3604-3610, 2024.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

AIM: Patient understanding of disease can guide decision-making in the management of anal fistula. This prospective feasibility study aimed to assess the acceptability and methods of assessing the impact of viewing realistic models on patients with anal fistula. METHODS: New referrals to a tertiary clinic participated in this single-centre, parallel-group randomized controlled study. Baseline characteristics, Decisional Conflict Scale and understanding of disease were assessed pre-consultation. Participants were randomized to a standard consultation, where disease and treatment options were explained using magnetic resonance images and drawn diagrams, or a similar consultation supplemented with an appropriate generic three-dimensional (3D) printed model. Understanding of disease and proposed surgery, Decisional Conflict Scale and ratings of visual aids were assessed post-consultation, along with 3D model feedback. RESULTS: All 52 patients who were approached agreed to be randomized (25 standard, 27 3D consultation). Understanding of disease increased post-consultation in both groups. Post-consultation decisional conflict (0, no; 100, high decisional conflict) was low (median 27 post-standard vs. 24 post-3D consultation). Patients scored highly on measures assessing understanding of proposed surgery. 3D models were rated highly, with 96% of patients wanting to see them again in future consultations. CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional printed fistula models are a welcome addition to outpatient consultations with results suggesting that understanding of surgery is improved. A future trial should be powered to detect whether 3D models result in a significant improvement in understanding beyond traditional methods of explanation and explore the conditions in which models have their maximal utility. GOV REGISTRATION ID: This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04069728). Registered on 23 August 2019.

Asunto(s)

RESUMEN

Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a common neurological disorder characterised by an urge to move arms and legs, usually associated with discomfort, pain, motor restlessness, and sleep disturbance. An individually adapted treatment is needed but difficult to optimise, which makes shared decision-making (SDM) important. However, brief validated instruments on how patients with RLS perceive their involvement in treatment decisions are lacking. Therefore, the aim was to validate two instruments, SURE (Sure of myself, Understand information, Risk-benefit ratio, Encouragement, i.e., to assess decisional conflict) and CollaboRATE (brief patient survey focused on SDM, i.e., to assess SDM), in patients with RLS. A cross-sectional design, including 788 participants with RLS (65% females, mean [SD] age 70.8 [11.4] years) from a national patient organisation for RLS, was used. A postal survey was sent out to collect data regarding weight, height, comorbidities, demographics, and RLS-related treatment data. The following instruments were included: the SURE, CollaboRATE, Restless Legs Syndrome-6 Scale, and eHealth Literacy Scale. Confirmatory factor analysis and Rasch models were used to assess the validity and reliability of the SURE and CollaboRATE. Measurement invariance, unidimensionality, and differential item functioning (DIF) across age, gender, and medication groups were assessed. The SURE and CollaboRATE were both identified as unidimensional instruments with satisfactory internal consistency. No DIF across age and gender was identified, while significant DIF was observed for both the SURE and CollaboRATE regarding medication use categories. However, both the SURE and CollaboRATE are potential instruments to be used in research, but also as reflection tools by healthcare professionals, patients, and students to explore and assess SDM, and support its development in clinical care.