Assessing Preference Shift and Effects on Patient Knowledge and Decisional Conflict: Cross-Sectional Study of an Interactive Prostate-Specific Antigen Test Patient Decision Aid.
ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Randomized trials of Web-based decision aids for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) testing indicate that these interventions improve knowledge and reduce decisional conflict. However, we do not know about these tools' impact on people who spontaneously use a PSA testing patient decision aid on the internet. OBJECTIVE:The objectives of this study were to (1) determine the impact of the Web-based PSA Option Grid patient decision aid on preference shift, knowledge, and decisional conflict; (2) identify which frequently asked questions (FAQs) are associated with preference shift; and (3) explore the possible relationships between these outcomes. METHODS:Data were collected between January 1, 2016, and December 30, 2017. Users who accessed the Web-based, interactive PSA Option Grid were provided with 3 options: have a PSA test, no PSA test, or unsure. Users first declared their initial preference and then completed 5 knowledge questions and a 4-item (yes or no) validated decisional conflict scale (Sure of myself, Understand information, Risk-benefit ratio, Encouragement; SURE). Next, users were presented with 10 FAQs and asked to identify their preference for each question based on the information provided. At the end, users declared their final preference and completed the same knowledge and decisional conflict questions. Paired sample t tests were employed to compare before and after knowledge and decisional conflict scores. A multinomial regression analysis was performed to determine which FAQs were associated with a shift in screening preference. RESULTS:Of all the people who accessed the PSA Option Grid, 39.8% (186/467) completed the interactive journey and associated surveys. After excluding 22 female users, we analyzed 164 responses. At completion, users shifted their preference to "not having the PSA test" (43/164, 26.2%, vs 117/164, 71.3%; P<.001), had higher levels of knowledge (112/164, 68.3%, vs 146/164, 89.0%; P<.001), and lower decisional conflict (94/164, 57.3%, vs 18/164, 11.0%; P<.001). There were 3 FAQs associated with preference shift: "What does the test involve?" "If my PSA level is high, what are the chances that I have prostate cancer?" and "What are the risks?" We did not find any relationship between knowledge, decisional conflict, and preference shift. CONCLUSIONS:Unprompted use of the interactive PSA Option Grid leads to preference shift, increased knowledge, and reduced decisional conflict, which confirms the ability of these tools to influence decision making, even when used outside clinical encounters.
Project description:Controversy about the costs and benefits of screening and treatment of prostate cancer (PCa) has recently intensified. However, the impact of the debate on PCa patients has not been systematically studied.We assessed knowledge of, and attitudes toward, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force's (USPSTF) May 2012 recommendation against PSA-based screening among men diagnosed with clinically localized PCa, and tested whether exposure to the recommendation and associated controversy about overtreatment of PCa predicted treatment decisional conflict, affected treatment choice, or increased regret about PSA testing.Accurate knowledge of the USPSTF recommendation was uncommon (19.1%). Attitudes toward the recommendation were negative, and the vast majority (86.5%) remained highly supportive of annual PSA testing in men ?50. Although exposure to the recommendation and controversy about treatment was associated with lower enthusiasm for screening and treatment, it was not associated with treatment decisions, or greater decisional-conflict, or regret.Findings may alleviate concern that exposure to PSA-based screening and overtreatment controversies has adversely affected recent cohorts of PCa patients. However, patients remain highly supportive of PSA-based screening. As survivor anecdotes often influence people's medical decisions, it is important to appreciate the scale of opposition to the new recommendation.
Project description:BACKGROUND: Patient education materials can assist patient decision making on prostate cancer screening. OBJECTIVE: To explore the effectiveness of presenting health information on prostate cancer screening using video, internet, and written interventions on patient decision making, attitudes, knowledge, and screening interest. DESIGN: Randomized controlled trial. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 161 men aged over 45, who had never been screened for prostate cancer, were randomized to receive information on prostate cancer screening. MEASUREMENTS: Participants were assessed at baseline and 1-week postintervention for decisional conflict, screening interest, knowledge, anxiety, and decision-making preference. RESULTS: A total of 156 men were followed-up at 1-week postintervention. There was no statistical, or clinical, difference in mean change in decisional conflict scores between the 3 intervention groups (video vs internet -0.06 [95% CI -0.24 to 0.12]; video vs pamphlet 0.04 [95%CI -0.15 to 0.22]; internet vs pamphlet 0.10 [95%CI -0.09 to 0.28]). There was also no statistically significant difference in mean knowledge, anxiety, decision-making preference, and screening interest between the 3 intervention groups. CONCLUSION: Results from this study indicate that there are no clinically significant differences in decisional conflict when men are presented health information on prostate cancer screening via video, written materials, or the internet. Given the equivalence of the 3 methods, other factors need to be considered in deciding which method to use. Health professionals should provide patient health education materials via a method that is most convenient to the patient and their preferred learning style.
Project description:Patients with type 2 diabetes (T2DM) often have poor glycemic control on first-line pharmacologic therapy and require treatment intensification. Intensification decisions can be difficult because of many available options and their many benefits and risks. The American Diabetes Association recommends patient-centered, evidence-based tools supporting shared decision-making between patients and clinicians. We developed a patient decision aid (PDA) targeting decisions about treatment intensification for T2DM. Our objective was to determine the effectiveness of this PDA for patients with T2DM on metformin who require treatment intensification.This study was a pragmatic randomized controlled trial conducted in 27 US primary care and endocrinology clinics. Subjects were English-speaking adults with T2DM receiving metformin with persistent hyperglycemia who were recommended to consider medication intensification. Subjects were randomized to receive either the PDA or usual care (UC). Main outcome measures were change in knowledge, decisional self-efficacy, and decisional conflict.Of 225 subjects enrolled, 114 were randomized to the PDA and 111 to UC. Mean [SD] age was 52  years, time since T2DM diagnosis was 6 [+/-6] years, 45.3% were male, and most (55.5%) were non-Caucasian. Compared to UC, PDA users had significantly larger knowledge gains (35.0% [22.3] vs 9.9% [22.2]; P?<?0.0001) and larger improvements in self-efficacy (3.7 [16.7] vs-3.9 [19.2]; P?<?0.0001) and decisional conflict (-22.2 [20.6] vs-7.5 [16.6]; P?<?0.0001).The PDA resulted in substantial and significant improvements in knowledge, decisional conflict and decisional self-efficacy. Decisional conflict scores after PDA use were within the range that correlates with effective decision-making. This PDA has the potential to facilitate shared-decision-making for patients with T2DM.NCT02110979.
Project description:Cancer clinical trials (CCTs) are important tools in the development of improved cancer therapies; yet, participation is low. Key psychosocial barriers exist that appear to impact a patient's decision to participate. Little is known about the relationship among knowledge, self-efficacy, preparation, decisional conflict, and patient decisions to take part in CCTs.The purpose of this study was to determine if preparation for consideration of a CCT as a treatment option mediates the relationship between knowledge, self-efficacy, and decisional conflict. We also explored whether lower levels of decisional conflict are associated with greater likelihood of CCT enrollment.In a pre-post test intervention study, cancer patients (N = 105) were recruited before their initial consultation with a medical oncologist. A brief educational intervention was provided for all patients. Patient self-report survey responses assessed knowledge, self-efficacy, preparation for clinical trial participation, decisional conflict, and clinical trial participation.Preparation was found to mediate the relationship between self-efficacy and decisional conflict (p = 0.003 for a test of the indirect mediational pathway for the decisional conflict total score). Preparation had a more limited role in mediating the effect of knowledge on decisional conflict. Further, preliminary evidence indicated that reduced decisional conflict was associated with increased clinical trial enrollment (p = 0.049).When patients feel greater CCT self-efficacy and have more knowledge, they feel more prepared to make a CCT decision. Reduced decisional conflict, in turn, is associated with the decision to enroll in a clinical trial. Our results suggest that preparation for decision-making should be a target of future interventions to improve participation in CCTs.
Project description:BACKGROUND: A comprehensive model of the relationships among different shared decision-making related constructs and their effects on patient-relevant outcomes is largely missing. Objective of our study was the development of a model linking decision-making in medical encounters to an intermediate and a long-term endpoint. The following hypotheses were tested: physicians are more likely to involve patients who have a preference for participation and are willing to take responsibility in the medical decision-making process, increased patient involvement decreases decisional conflict, and lower decisional conflict favourably influences patient satisfaction with the physician. METHODS: This model was tested in a German primary care sample (N?=?1,913). Psychometrically tested instruments were administered to assess the following: patients' preference for being involved in medical decision-making, patients' experienced involvement in medical decision-making, decisional conflict, and satisfaction with the primary care provider. Structural equation modelling was used to explore multiple associations. The model was tested and adjusted in a development sub-sample and cross-validated in a confirmatory sample. Demographic and clinical characteristics were accounted for as possible confounders. RESULTS: Local and global indexes suggested an acceptable fit between the theoretical model and the data. Increased patient involvement was strongly associated with decreased decisional conflict (standardised regression coefficient ??=?-.73). Both high experienced involvement (??=?.34) and low decisional conflict (B?=?-.28) predicted higher satisfaction with the physician. Patients' preference for involvement was negatively associated with the experienced involvement (B?=?-.24). CONCLUSION: Altogether, our model could be largely corroborated by the collected empirical data except the unexpected negative association between preference for involvement and experienced involvement. Future research on the associations among different SDM-related constructs should incorporate longitudinal studies in order to strengthen the hypothesis of causal associations.
Project description:BACKGROUND:We have shown in a randomized controlled trial that a computerized patient decision aid (P-DA) improves medical knowledge and reduces decisional conflict, in early stage papillary thyroid cancer patients considering adjuvant radioactive iodine treatment. Our objectives were to examine the relationship between participants' baseline information preference style and the following: 1) quantity of detailed information obtained within the P-DA, and 2) medical knowledge. METHODS:We randomized participants to exposure to a one-time viewing of a computerized P-DA (with usual care) or usual care alone. In pre-planned secondary analyses, we examined the relationship between information preference style (Miller Behavioural Style Scale, including respective monitoring [information seeking preference] and blunting [information avoidance preference] subscale scores) and the following: 1) the quantity of detailed information obtained from the P-DA (number of supplemental information clicks), and 2) medical knowledge. Spearman correlation values were calculated to quantify relationships, in the entire study population and respective study arms. RESULTS:In the 37 P-DA users, high monitoring information preference was moderately positively correlated with higher frequency of detailed information acquisition in the P-DA (r = 0.414, p = 0.011). The monitoring subscale score weakly correlated with increased medical knowledge in the entire study population (r = 0.268, p = 0.021, N = 74), but not in the respective study arms. There were no significant associations with the blunting subscale score. CONCLUSIONS:Individual variability in information preferences may affect the process of information acquisition from computerized P-DA's. More research is needed to understand how individual information preferences may impact medical knowledge acquisition and decision-making.
Project description:INTRODUCTION:Decision aids (DAs) around prostate cancer screening can increase knowledge and shared decision making (SDM), but remain underutilized due to cost and time constraints that disrupt clinic flow. We examined the impact of a simple prostate specific antigen (PSA) screening DA distribution strategy on clinic flow as well as SDM in a diverse urban primary care clinic. METHODS:Men ages 50-75 viewed the DA while waiting for physicians. Participants and physicians completed questionnaires evaluating the SDM process. Focus groups were conducted with clinic staff and physicians to evaluate the impact on clinic operations. RESULTS:Fifty percent of men discussed PSA screening and 85% reported the DA made decision making easier. Participants reported an average of 12.9 min reading the DA. Participants reported high decision satisfaction and low decisional conflict. Physicians reported an average of 5.2 minutes discussing PSA screening. Clinic staff reported increased enthusiasm for the process after adjustments were made in response to concerns including time, and lack of both knowledge about the DA subject matter and involvement in the process. Physician-reported barriers included ambivalence about PSA screening. CONCLUSIONS:A PSA DA, requiring few resources, can be implemented with broad involvement of clinic staff and minimal disruption to clinic flow in an urban primary care clinic, and may facilitate SDM.
Project description:Breast cancer is the most common type of female cancer. Tamoxifen, a selective estrogen receptor modulator, is widely used to decrease breast cancer recurrence and mortality among patients. However, it also increases the risk of endometrial cancer. This study aimed to assess knowledge and decisional conflict regarding tamoxifen use. Between June and October 2014, breast cancer patients using tamoxifen were consecutively screened and requested to complete a survey including the EQ-5D, Satisfaction with Decision Scale (SWD), Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), and a self-developed, 15-item questionnaire measuring tamoxifen-related knowledge. The study sample comprised 299 patients. The mean total knowledge score was 63.4 of a possible 100.0 (range, 13.3-93.3). While 73.9% of the participants knew that tamoxifen reduces the risk of breast cancer recurrence, only 57.9% knew that the drug increases endometrial cancer risk. A higher education level (? college) was associated with a higher, total knowledge score (? = 4.291; P = 0.017). A higher knowledge score was associated with a decreased DCS score (? = -0.366; P < 0.001). A higher SWD score was also associated with decreased decisional conflict (? = -0.178; P < 0.001). In conclusion, the breast cancer patients with higher levels of tamoxifen-related knowledge showed lower levels of decisional conflict regarding tamoxifen use. Clinicians should provide the exact information about tamoxifen treatment to patients, based on knowledge assessment results, so as to aid patients' decision-making with minimal conflict.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Screening with prostate-specific antigen (PSA) test for prostate cancer is considered a preference sensitive decision; meaning it does not only depend on what is best from a medical point of view, but also from a patient value standpoint. Decision aids are evidence-based tools which are shown to help people feel clearer about their values; therefore it has been advocated that decision aids should contain a specific values clarification method (VCM). VCMs may be either implicit or explicit, but the evidence concerning the best method is scarce. We aim to compare the perceived clarity of personal values in men considering PSA screening using decision aids with no VCM versus an implicit VCM versus an explicit VCM. METHODS:Male factory employees from an industrial facility in the Northern region of Portugal aged 50 to 69?years old will be randomly assigned to one of three decision aid groups used to support prostate cancer screening decisions: (i) decision aid with information only (control), (ii) decision aid with information plus an implicit VCM, (iii) decision aid with information plus an explicit VCM. Men will be allowed release time from work to attend a session at their workplace. After a brief oral presentation, those willing to participate in the study will fill the baseline questionnaire, plus a 5 point-Likert scale question about intentions to undergo screening, and will then receive the intervention materials to complete. We estimated a total sample size of 276 participants; with 92 in each group. The primary outcome will be the perceived clarity of personal values assessed by the Portuguese validated translation of the three subscales of the Decisional Conflict Scale. Secondary outcomes will be intention to be screened (before and after the intervention), the total score from the Decisional Conflict Scale and the self-report of having or not undergone screening at 6?months. DISCUSSION:This study will add to the body of evidence on the role of decision aids to support health preference-sensitive choices and provide further insight on the impact of different methods for eliciting people's values embedded within a decision aid. TRIAL REGISTRATION:NCT03988673 - clinicalTrials.gov (2019/06/17).
Project description:Background:Severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients are often unprepared to make decisions about accepting intubation for respiratory failure. We developed a Web-based decision aid, InformedTogether, to facilitate severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients' preparation for decision making about whether to accept invasive mechanical ventilation for respiratory failure. Objective:We describe feasibility testing of the InformedTogether decision aid. Methods:Mixed methods, pre- and postintervention feasibility study in outpatient pulmonary and geriatric clinics. Clinicians used InformedTogether with severe Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients. Patient-participants completed pre- and postassessments about InformedTogether use. The outcomes measured were the following: feasibility/acceptability, communication (Combined Outcome Measure for Risk Communication [COMRADE], Medical Communication Competency Scale [MCCS], Observing Patient Involvement [OPTION] scales), and effectiveness of InformedTogether on changing patients' knowledge, Decisional Conflict Scale, and motivation. Results:We enrolled 11 clinicians and 38 Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients at six sites. Feasibility/acceptability: Clinicians and patients gave positive responses to acceptability questions (mean 74.1/89 max [SD 7.24] and mean 59.63/61 [SD 4.49], respectively). Communication: 96% of clinicians stated InformedTogether improved communication (modified MCCS mean 44.54/49 [SD 2.97]; mean OPTION score 32.03/48 [SD 9.27]; mean COMRADE Satisfaction 4.31/5.0 [SD 0.58]; and COMRADE Confidence 4.18/5.0 [SD 0.56]). Preference: Eighty percent of patients discussed preferences with their surrogates by 1-month. Effectiveness: Knowledge scores increased significantly after using InformedTogether (mean difference 3.61 [SD 3. 44], P=.001) and Decisional Conflict decreased (mean difference Decisional Conflict Scale pre/post -13.76 [SD 20.39], P=.006). Motivation increased after viewing the decision aid. Conclusions:InformedTogether supports high-quality communication and shared decision making among Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease patients, clinicians, and surrogates. The increased knowledge and opportunity to deliberate and discuss treatment choices after using InformedTogether should lead to improved decision making at the time of critical illness.