Validation and cross-cultural measurement invariance of the English and French versions of the Decision Regret Scale among people living with chronic noncancer pain: A secondary analysis of the DECIDE-PAIN pan-Canadian survey.

MP37-05 SATISFACTION WITH DECISION AND DECISIONAL REGRET AFTER MID-URETHRAL SLING AND URETHRAL BULKING INJECTION FOR STRESS URINARY INCONTINENCE

106 Background: Fertility is important to many young breast cancer survivors (YBCS), who face difficult decisions on whether to undergo fertility preservation prior to treatment. Because few longitudinal data assessing decisional regret are available, the objectives of this study were to assess longitudinal changes in decisional regret on fertility preservation following breast cancer diagnosis; determine if fertility preservation treatment decisions are related to decreased decisional regret. Methods: From 3 academic breast cancer programs, 169 YBCS younger than age 45 were recruited at diagnosis between 2009 and 2012 and followed prospectively for ovarian function. Participants completed questionnaires on fertility preservation choices and the Decisional Regret Scale (DRS) during study visits every 6 months for up to 5 years. DRS is scored 0 (no regret) to 100 (highest regret). DRS was dichotomized as none versus any decisional regret. Generalized linear models estimated the change in DRS over time and the association between patient characteristics and DRS. Results: Mean age at diagnosis was 38.7 (SD 4.8). Median total follow-up was 176 days (IQR 84 to 1415 days). Enrollment DRS was available for 89 women; 48% reported decisional regret about fertility preservation (median DRS=20). Participants worried about future fertility were more likely to report decisional regret (p=0.009). 31% underwent fertility preservation, but this was not associated with decisional regret (p=0.65). In repeated measures analysis for the entire cohort, no significant change in DRS occurred over this time period (OR 0.8, 95% CI 0.4-1.7). Worry about future fertility remained significantly associated with DRS over time (OR 55.1, 95% CI 7.7-395.1). Conclusions: In a cohort of YBCS, experiencing decisional regret about fertility preservation persists for years after diagnosis. Those worried about future fertility are more likely to experience decisional regret regarding fertility preservation.

Measurement properties of the decisional conflict scale in people living with chronic non-cancer pain: a secondary analysis of the DECIDE-PAIN pan-Canadian survey.

BackgroundHealth literacy is a multidimensional concept comprising various individual skills and situational resources and is increasingly recognized as a critical determinant of health. Limited health literacy has been demonstrated to...

The Decision Regret Scale (DRS) is a valid instrument evaluating the "correctness" of a treatment decision from the patient perspective. The minimal clinically important difference (MCID) is proposed as a threshold for patient-reported outcome measure (PROM) improvement success. The relationship between decision regret and failure to achieve clinical success in adult spinal deformity (ASD) surgeries is not known. The authors sought to examine the relationships between the DRS and outcomes, as measured by the Scoliosis Research Society-22r (SRS-22r), in ASD surgery. ASD patients with a minimum 2-year follow-up completed the DRS and SRS-22r questionnaires. Records were reviewed for complications and revision surgeries. SRS-22r domain scores were dichotomized as successful or not by MCID values. Patients with DRS scores of 0-20 were defined as having no decision regret. Relationships between DRS and SRS-22r domain scores were explored, as were relationships between DRS and complication/revision surgery. A total of 46 patients met inclusion criteria. The average age was 64 years, and the average follow-up was 4.3 years (range 2.0-15.5 years). The mean DRS score was 7.6 with a median score of 0; 15% (7/46) expressed decision regret. Worse SRS-22r pain (p = 0.049), function (p = 0.03), and satisfaction (p = 0.006) were associated with higher DRS scores. Rates of decision regret were not different between those achieving MCID and those who did not (pain, p = 0.1; function, p = 0.1; self-image, p = 0.4; and subscore p = 0.09). There was no difference in the number of patients with decision regret in terms of postoperative complications or patients requiring revision surgery and those who did not. Decision regret after ASD surgeries was uncommon despite complications, reoperations, and failure to achieve MCID changes in SRS-22r domains. Worse SRS-22r pain, function, and satisfaction scores were associated with more decision regret, however.

PD49-03 PARENTAL DECISION REGRET AFTER CIRCUMCISION REVISION AND DISTAL HYPOSPADIAS REPAIR IN THE CONTEXT OF EVERYDAY DECISIONS AND NON-PENILE SURGERIES

Translation and adaptation of the multidimensional measure of informed choice and the decision regret scale for evaluating non-invasive prenatal test implementation in Norwegian public healthcare.

BackgroundWhether surrogate decision makers regret decisions about the use of life support for incapacitated, critically ill patients remain uncertain. We sought to determine the prevalence of decision regret among surrogates of adult ICU patients and identify factors that influence regret.MethodsWe conducted a secondary analysis of data from the PARTNER 2 trial, which tested a family support intervention for surrogates of critically ill adults. At 6-month follow-up, surrogates rated their regret about life support decisions using the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), scored from 0 to 100, with higher scores indicating more regret. We used multiple linear regression to identify covariates associated with decision regret based on a psychological construct of regret. We constructed two models using the full cohort; model 1 included patient outcomes; model 2 focused on covariates known at the time of ICU decision-making. Subgroup analyses were also conducted based on patient survival status at hospital discharge and 6-month follow-up.Results748 of 848 surrogates had complete DRS data. The median (IQR) DRS score was 15 (0, 25). Overall, 54% reported mild regret (DRS 5–25), 19% moderate-strong regret (DRS 30–100), and 27% no regret (DRS 0). Poor patient outcome at 6 months (death or severe functional dependence) was associated with more regret in model 1 (β 10.1; 95% C.I. 3.2, 17.0). In model 2, palliative care consultation (3.0; 0.1, 5.9), limitations in life support (LS) prior to death (6.3; 3.1, 9.4) and surrogate black race (6.3; 0.3, 12.3) were associated with more regret. Other modulators of regret in subgroup analyses included surrogate age and education level, surrogate-patient relationship, death in hospital (compared to the post-discharge period), and code status at time of ICU admission.ConclusionsOne in five ICU surrogate decision makers experience moderate to strong regret about life support decisions in ICU. Poor patient outcomes are linked to more regret. Decisions to limit life support prior to patient death may also increase regret. Future studies are needed to understand how regret relates to decision quality and how to lessen lasting regret.

To review the published literature on decisional regret in adult patients undergoing operative otolaryngology procedures. The primary outcome was decisional regret scale (DRS) scores. DRS scores of 0 indicate no regret, 1-25 mild regret, and >25 moderate to strong/severe regret. A comprehensive librarian-designed strategy was used to search MEDLINE, Embase, and CINAHL from inception to September 2023. Inclusion criteria consisted of English-language studies of adult patients who underwent operative otolaryngology treatments and reported DRS scores. Data was extracted by two independent reviewers. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses Extension for Scoping Reviews (PRISMA-ScR) guidelines were followed. Oxford Centre's Levels of Evidence were used for quality assessment. In total, 6306 studies were screened by two independent reviewers; 13 studies were included after full-text analysis. Subspecialties comprised: Head and neck (10), endocrine (1), general (1), and rhinology (1). The DRS results of the included studies spanned a mean range of 10.1-23.9 or a median range of 0-20.0. There was a trend toward more decisional regret after large head and neck procedures or when patients underwent multiple treatment modalities. Depression, anxiety, and patient-reported quality of life measures were all correlated with decisional regret. Oxford Centre's Levels of Evidence ranged from 2 to 4. This is the first comprehensive review of decisional regret in otolaryngology. The majority of patients had no or mild (DRS <25) decisional regret after otolaryngology treatments. Future research on pre-operative counseling and shared decision-making to further minimize patient decisional regret is warranted. N/A Laryngoscope, 134:2562-2567, 2024.

In Singapore, most elderly end-stage renal disease (ESRD) patients choose dialysis over palliative management. However, dialysis may not be the optimal treatment option given only moderate survival benefits and high costs and treatment burden compared to non-dialysis management. Elderly patients may therefore come to regret this decision. This study investigated: (i) extent of patients' decision regret after starting dialysis, and (ii) potentially modifiable predictors of regret: satisfaction with chronic kidney disease education, decisional conflict, and decision-making involvement. The present study was a cross-sectional study of 103 dialysis patients above 70 years of age, surveyed at Singapore General Hospital's renal medicine clinics between March and June 2017. Participants reported their levels of decision regret on the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), retrospective decisional conflict on the Decisional Conflict Scale, information satisfaction, and decision-making involvement. In total, 81% of participants reported no decision regret (DRS score < 50), 11% ambivalence (DRS = 50), and 8% regret (DRS >50). In individual DRS items, 19% felt dialysis had done them harm and 16% would not make the same decision again. In multivariable analyses, lower information satisfaction [b = -0.07 (95% CI: -0.13, -0.01)] and decisional conflict [b = 0.004 (95% CI: 0.002, 0.006)] were significantly associated with decision regret. Although the majority of elderly dialysis patients were comfortable with their decision to start dialysis, a proportion was ambivalent or regretted this choice. Regret was more likely among those who experienced decisional conflict and/or expressed poorer information satisfaction. Healthcare professionals should recognize these risk factors and take steps to minimize chances of regret among this population subset.

Parent decisional regret regarding neonatal circumcision in an American outpatient pediatric urology clinic

Long-term Functional Outcomes and Decision Regret after Robot-assisted Radical Prostatectomy: An Experienced Surgeon Series.

PurposeThe decision-making process regarding cancer treatment is emotionally challenging for patients and families, harboring the risk of decision regret. We aimed to explore prevalence and determinants of decision regret following radiotherapy.MethodsThis cross-sectional observational study was conducted at a tertiary cancer center to assess decision regret following radiotherapy. The study employed the German version of the Ottawa Decision Regret Scale (DRS) which was validated in the study population. Decision regret was categorized as absent (0 points), mild (1–25 points), and strong (> 25 points). Various psychosocial outcome measures were collected using validated questionnaires to identify factors that may be associated with decision regret.ResultsOut of 320 eligible patients, 212 participated, with 207 completing the DRS. Median age at start of radiotherapy was 64 years [interquartile range (IQR), 56–72], genders were balanced (105 female, 102 male), and the most common cancer types were breast (n = 84; 41%), prostate (n = 57; 28%), and head-and-neck cancer (n = 19; 9%). Radiotherapy was applied with curative intention in 188 patients (91%). Median time between last radiotherapy fraction and questionnaire completion was 23 months (IQR, 1–38). DRS comprehensibility was rated as good or very good by 98% (196 of 201) of patients. Decision regret was reported by 43% (n = 90) as absent, 38% (n = 78) as mild, and 18% (n = 38) as strong. In the multiple regression analysis, poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, low social support, and dissatisfaction with care were independent risk factors for higher decision regret after radiotherapy.ConclusionsThe German version of the DRS could be used to assess decision regret in a diverse cohort of cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. Decision regret was prevalent in a considerable proportion of patients. Further studies are necessary to validate these findings and obtain causal factors associated with decision regret after radiotherapy.

IntroductionInitiating disease-modifying treatments (DMTs) in multiple sclerosis (MS) is a major decision for people with (pw)MS but little is known about how the decision is perceived by the individual.ObjectivesThe aim of the study was to determine if decisional conflict (DC) and decisional regret reflect different stages of the decision-making process when initiating DMTs.MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study of three cohorts of pwMS (n = 254), a ‘MS conference attendees’, ‘on treatment’ and an ‘offered treatment’ cohort. Questionnaires assessing DC, decisional regret and control preference were performed.ResultsForty-four per cent (113/254) of pwMS were dissatisfied with their treatment status and 53% (135/254) had DC. DC (p = 0.013) and decisional regret (p = 0.027) increase in treatment-naïve pwMS and also in those ‘offered treatment’ dissatisfied with their treatment status (p < 0.0001), whilst those ‘on treatment’ have low Decisional Regret Scale (DRS) score (p = 0.0005). DC and DRS were only correlated with treatment status in those on treatment and not in treatment-naïve patients. F (58/135) pwMS satisfied with treatment had DC. DC (n = 236, adjusted R2 0.137, p = 0.000) and DRS (n = 235, adjusted R2 0.232, p = 0.000) were increased by dissatisfaction with treatment, lower potency treatment, being from the ‘MS conference attendees’ cohort and reliance on the doctor’s decision, with DC additionally associated with being employed.ConclusionsDC and decisional regret vary in populations at different stages of initiating DMTs and are impacted by non-treatment issues.

People often face difficult decisions about their health and may later regret the choice that they made. However, little is known about the extent of decision regret in health care or its predictors. We systematically reviewed evidence about the extent of decision regret and its risk factors among individuals making health decisions. The data sources were Medline, Embase, and reverse citation searches in Google Scholar and Web of Science. Studies using the Decision Regret Scale (DRS) to measure decision regret among individuals making nonhypothetical health decisions were included. There were no restrictions on study design, setting, or language. We extracted characteristics of included studies, measures of central tendency for DRS scores (0 = no regret, 100 = high regret), and all risk factors from published analyses. Quality appraisal was conducted using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. A narrative synthesis was performed owing to the heterogeneity of studies. The initial search yielded 372 unique titles, and 59 studies were included. The overall mean DRS score across studies was 16.5, and the median of the mean scores was 14.3 (standard deviation range = 2.2-34.5) (n = 44 studies). The risk factors most frequently reported to be associated with decision regret in multivariate analyses included higher decisional conflict, lower satisfaction with the decision, adverse physical health outcomes, and greater anxiety levels. The extent of decision regret as assessed with the DRS in nonhypothetical health decisions was often low but reached high levels for some decisions. Several risk factors related to the decision-making process significantly predicted decision regret. Additional research into the psychometrics of the DRS and the relevance of scores for clinicians and patients would increase the validity of decision regret as a patient-reported outcome.