Introduction: Catheter ablation is a common treatment for atrial fibrillation (AF) with nuanced risks and benefits. Shared decision-making (SDM) could guide the decision to undergo ablation based on patient values and goals of care. Understanding whether and how SDM about ablation is conducted in clinical practice would allow us to determine how to optimize patient decision making and decision quality. The objective of this study was to investigate decision quality and SDM practices surrounding AF ablation. Methods: We conducted a mixed-methods study guided by Sepucha & Scholl’s (2014) SDM framework which specifies decision antecedents, processes, and outcomes. We recruited a convenience sample of AF ablation patients (n=15) and clinicians (n=5; 3 MDs, 1 PA, 1 NP) from a hospital in Queens, New York. Patients completed the AF Symptom Survey (AFSS), Controls-Preferences scale (CPS), and Decisional Conflict scale (DCS), which were summarized using descriptive statistics (median, interquartile range [IQR], and frequency). Patients and clinicians completed semi-structured interviews, which were analyzed using directed content analysis. Participants received $25 as compensation. The Weill Cornell Medicine IRB approved this study. Results: Patients’ median age was 71.0 years (IQR 69.0-78.5), 27% were female, 67% were White, and 73% spoke English. The median AFSS score was 0 (IQR 0-1.0) out of 35 indicating low symptom burden post-ablation. The median DCS score was 7.0 (IQR 0-16.4) out of 100 indicating low levels of conflict. On the CPS 4 patients (27%) preferred to have some control in decision-making; the remainder preferred to share control or relinquish it to clinicians. Qualitative findings underscore low levels of decisional conflict but limited patient agency (Table) . Conclusion: Findings suggest opportunities to improve decision quality surrounding AF ablation by bolstering patient agency, possibly through educational materials and decision aids.
Read full abstract