Dataset Information

The GOAL-Hem journey: Shared decision making and patient-centred outcomes.

ABSTRACT:

Introduction

GOAL-Hēm is a novel, haemophilia-specific, patient-centred outcome measure (PCOM) based on goal attainment scaling, allowing people with haemophilia (PwH) to set and monitor the attainment of individualized goals for treatment.

Aim

To provide a thorough overview of the creation, validation, and development of GOAL-Hēm.

Methods

Clinician workshops were held to develop a haemophilia-specific goal menu. Qualitative data from semistructured interviews with PwH and their caregivers guided further revisions to the goal menu (i.e., goal domains and descriptors). A feasibility study was performed including a 12-week, prospective, noninterventional evaluation involving clinicians and PwH at four US haemophilia treatment centres. Finally, the Patient Voice Study gathered feedback from PwH and their caregivers via an online survey, interviews, and a focus group.

Results

The feasibility study validated GOAL-Hēm with successful outcomes in construct/content validity and responsiveness, including a large effect in patient- and clinician-rated goal attainments. The Patient Voice Study led to significant refinement of GOAL-Hēm goals and descriptors, resulting in a more straightforward and relatable menu for PwH and their caregivers. Overall, GOAL-Hēm captured qualitative data in areas important to PwH and employed quantitative methods to evaluate meaningful changes in those areas. The individualized tool was well equipped to handle the complex and chronic nature of haemophilia and was endorsed by PwH, their caregivers, and clinicians.

Conclusion

The GOAL-Hēm development journey may serve as a roadmap for other PCOMs in a variety of settings, including clinical studies, haemophilia treatment centres for care planning, and as a tool to gather real-world evidence.

SUBMITTER: Roberts JC

PROVIDER: S-EPMC9546188 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Sep

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

The GOAL-Hēm journey: Shared decision making and patient-centred outcomes.

Roberts Jonathan C JC Richardson Sharon S Miles Moses E ME Stanley Justin J Chapman Chere A T CAT Denne Michael M Caicedo Jorge J Rockwood Kenneth K Recht Michael M

Haemophilia : the official journal of the World Federation of Hemophilia 20220621 5

<h4>Introduction</h4>GOAL-Hēm is a novel, haemophilia-specific, patient-centred outcome measure (PCOM) based on goal attainment scaling, allowing people with haemophilia (PwH) to set and monitor the attainment of individualized goals for treatment.<h4>Aim</h4>To provide a thorough overview of the creation, validation, and development of GOAL-Hēm.<h4>Methods</h4>Clinician workshops were held to develop a haemophilia-specific goal menu. Qualitative data from semistructured interviews with PwH and ...[more]

PMID: 35728103

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundDespite widespread advocacy for shared decision making (SDM), the empirical evidence regarding its effectiveness to improve patient outcomes has not been systematically reviewed. The purpose of this study was to systematically review the empirical evidence linking patient outcomes and SDM, when the decision-making process has been explicitly measured, and to identify under what measurement perspectives SDM is associated with which types of patient outcomes (affective-cognitive, behavioral, and health).Data sourcesPubMed (through December 2012) and hand search of article bibliographies.Study selectionStudies were included if they empirically 1) measured SDM in the context of a patient-clinician interaction and 2) evaluated the relationship between SDM and at least 1 patient outcome.Data extractionStudy results were categorized by SDM measurement perspective (patient-reported, clinician-reported, or observer-rated) and outcome type (affective-cognitive, behavioral, or health).Data synthesisThirty-nine studies met inclusion criteria. Thirty-three used patient-reported measures of SDM, 6 used observer-rated measures, and 2 used clinician-reported measures. Ninety-seven unique patient outcomes were assessed; 51% affective-cognitive, 28% behavioral, and 21% health. Only 43% of assessments (n = 42) found a significant and positive relationship between SDM and the patient outcome. This proportion varied by SDM measurement perspective and outcome category. It was found that 52% of outcomes assessed with patient-reported SDM were significant and positive, compared with 21% with observer-rated and 0% with clinician-reported SDM. Regardless of measurement perspective, SDM was most likely to be associated with affective-cognitive patient outcomes (54%), compared with 37% of behavioral and 25% of health outcomes.LimitationsThe relatively small number of studies precludes meta-analysis. Because the study inclusion and exclusion criteria required both an empirical measure of SDM and an assessment of the association between that measure and a patient outcome, most included studies were observational in design.ConclusionsSDM, when perceived by patients as occurring, tends to result in improved affective-cognitive outcomes. Evidence is lacking for the association between empirical measures of SDM and patient behavioral and health outcomes.

Project description:BackgroundThere is a need for better implementation of patient-centred (PC) communication and shared decision-making (SDM) in routine cancer care.ObjectiveThe aim of this study was to assess whether a programme to implement SDM in oncology had effects on PC communication in clinical encounters.DesignThis study constitutes a secondary analysis of data derived from an implementation trial applying a stepped wedge design that, among other strategies, incorporated training and coaching to enhance the PC communication skills of physicians.Setting and participantsWe analysed audio recordings of clinical encounters collected in three departments of a comprehensive cancer centre in Germany before and after rolling out the implementation programme.Main variables studiedWe assessed the PC communication skills of physicians.Main outcome measuresEach recording was rated by two researchers using the German version of the Four Habits Coding Scheme (4HCS), an observer-based measure of PC communication. Interrater reliability of the outcome measure was acceptable but moderate. Demographic data of patients participating in audio recordings were analysed.MethodsData were analysed using descriptive statistics and linear mixed-effects models.ResultsIn total, 146 encounters, 74 before and 72 after implementation, were evaluated. The mean age of patients was 57.1 years (SD = 13.8), 70.3% were female, the largest portion of patients had medium formal education (32.4%) and were (self-) employed (37.8%). No statistically significant effect of the implementation programme on the physicians' PC communication skills was found.DiscussionThe results indicate that the investigated programme to implement SDM in oncology, including training and coaching, had no effects on PC communication in clinical encounters. These results are in contrast to other studies that report the effects of specific training or coaching on PC communication. Reasons for the lack of effect include the short duration of our training compared to other studies, limited reliability and moderate interrater reliability of the 4HCS scale, limited reach of the intervention programme as well as the inclusion of physicians regardless of their exposure to the interventions.ConclusionFurther research is needed to develop implementation strategies that improve physicians' PC communication skills.Patient contributionData on patients and clinical encounters with patients and physicians were analysed. There was no other patient or public involvement.

Project description:Background. Although effective interventions for shared decision making (SDM) exist, there is a lack of uptake of these tools into clinical practice. "Nudges," which draw on behavioral economics and target automatic thinking processes, are used by policy makers to influence population-level behavior change. Nudges have not been applied in the context of SDM interventions but have potential to influence clinician motivation, a primary barrier to long-term adoption of SDM tools. Objective. Describe, evaluate, and propose recommendations for the use of a behavioral economics framework (MINDSPACE) on clinician motivation and behavior during implementation of a validated decision aid (DA) for left ventricular assist device at nine hospitals. Methods. Qualitative thematic analysis of process notes from stakeholder meetings during the first 6 months of implementation to identify examples of how the MINDSPACE framework was operationalized. Quantitative implementation progress was evaluated using the RE-AIM framework. Results. MINDSPACE components were translated into concrete approaches that leveraged influential stakeholders, fostered ownership over the DA and positive emotional associations, spread desirable norms across sites, and situated the DA within established default processes. DA reach to eligible patients increased from 9.8% in the first month of implementation to 70.0% in the sixth month. Larger gains in reach were observed following meetings using MINDSPACE approaches. Limitations. The MINDSPACE framework does not capture all possible influences on behavior and responses to nudges may differ across populations. Conclusions. Behavioral economics can be applied to implementation science to foster uptake of SDM tools by increasing clinician motivation. Our recommendations can help other researchers effectively apply these approaches in real-world settings when there are often limited incentives and opportunities to change organizational- or structural-level factors.