Decisional Conflict Scale Research Articles

Evaluation of a computerized contraceptive decision aid: A randomized controlled trial

ObjectiveTo evaluate the effectiveness of a contraceptive decision aid in reducing decisional conflict among women seeking reversible contraception. Study DesignWe conducted a randomized trial of a computer-based decision aid compared to a control group for women presenting for reversible contraception at two clinics affiliated with an academic medical center. The primary outcome was change in decisional conflict, measured before and after the healthcare visit using the validated Decisional Conflict Scale. We hypothesized the decision aid would reduce the decisional conflict score by 10 points on a 100-point scale (0 = no conflict, 100 = high conflict) compared to the control group. Secondary outcomes included contraceptive method chosen and satisfaction with the healthcare visit. ResultsWe enrolled and randomized 253 women, and 241 had complete data for our primary outcome. Overall, pre-visit decisional conflict scores were low, reflecting low levels of decisional conflict in our sample; median score 15 (range 0–80) in the decision aid and 10 (0–85) in the control group (p = 0.45). Both groups had a similar reduction in median decisional conflict after the healthcare visit: −10 (−80 to 25) and −10 (−60 to 5) in the decision aid and control groups respectively (p = 0.99). Choice of contraception (p = 0.23) and satisfaction with healthcare provider (p = 0.79) also did not differ by study group. ConclusionsDecisional conflict around contraception was low in both groups at baseline. Use of a computerized contraceptive decision aid did not reduce decisional conflict, alter method choice, or impact satisfaction compared to the control group among women choosing reversible contraception. ImplicationsUse of a computerized contraceptive decision aid did not reduce decisional conflict or alter method choice compared to the control group among women choosing reversible contraception. Future studies could focus on testing the decision aid in different clinical settings, especially where barriers to providing comprehensive contraceptive counseling exist.

Evaluation of the Decision Aid for Genital Surgery in Transmen

BackgroundMultiple options of genital gender-affirming surgery are available to transmen. The transman should be able to weigh these options based on the outcomes, risks, and consequences that are most important to him. For this reason, a decision aid for genital surgery in transmen (DA-GST) was developed. It aims to support the transman in making thoughtful choices among treatment options and facilitate shared decision-making between the healthcare professionals and the transindividual. AimThe aim of this study was to evaluate the newly developed DA-GST. MethodsThis was a cross-sectional study using mixed methods. Transmen considering to undergo genital surgery were eligible to partake in the study. The questionnaires used in this study were developed by adapting the validated Dutch translation of the “Decisional Conflict Scale,” the “Measures of Informed Choice,” and the “Ottawa Preparation for Decision-Making Scale.” Qualitative interviews were conducted querying their subjective experience with the DA-GST. The data from the questionnaires were statistically analyzed, and the data from the interviews were thematically analyzed. OutcomesThe main outcome measures were decisional conflict and decisional confidence measured via self-report items and qualitative data regarding the use of the DA-GST via interviews. ResultsIn total, 51 transmen participated in the questionnaires study, 99 questionnaires were analyzed, and 15 interviews were conducted. Although confident in their decision, most transmen felt responsible to collect the necessary information themselves. The ability to go through the decision aid independently aided the decision-making process by providing information and highlighting their subjective priorities. Suggested additions are pictures of postoperational outcomes and personal statements from experienced transmen. Clinical TranslationThe DA-GST could be implemented as an integral part of transgender health care. Clinicians could take the individual personal values into account and use it to accurately tailor their consult. This would ultimately improve the doctor-patient relationship and decrease decisional regret by enhancing effective shared decision-making. Strengths & LimitationsThis mixed-method design study confirmed the use of the DA-GST while taking a broad range of decisional factors into account. Limitations include the absence of a baseline analysis and the limited power for the comparison of treatment groups. ConclusionsThis study suggests that the DA-GST helped transmen feel more prepared for their personal consult with the surgeon, reduced decisional conflict, and increased their decisional confidence.Mokken SE, Özer M, van de Grift TC, et al. Evaluation of the Decision Aid for Genital Surgery in Transmen. J Sex Med 2020;17:2067–2076.

Oral literacy in pediatric otolaryngology surgical consultations amongst parents with high levels of decisional conflict

ObjectivesOral literacy is an important aspect of physician and patient/family communication. Adequate communication is essential in the shared decision-making process and is inherently important in pediatric surgical consultations where parents must make decisions for their children. The aim of this study was to describe oral literacy in pediatric otolaryngology consultations and how it may relate to shared decision-making in a cohort of parents experiencing significant decisional conflict. MethodsThirty-six parent/patient-physician interactions from two pediatric otolaryngology clinics were recorded. Parents completed the Decision Conflict Scale (DCS), and both parents and physicians completed the Shared Decision-making (SDM-Q-9/SDM-Q-Doc) questionnaires. Language complexity was assessed by the Flesch Reading Ease Scale (FRES), the Simple Measure of Gobbledygook (SMOG) Readability Formula, and a series of grammar statistics. The Pearson product-moment was used to examine the correlation between measures. ResultsThe mean age of parents was 32.3 (mother) and 34.8 (father) years, with the majority having a college education or greater (77.8%). The mean DCS score was 85.8 (range 56–100), and all parents reported clinically significant conflict scores (DCS score > 25). Physicians spoke at a higher-grade level (mean difference SMOG 1.2 (95% CI: 0.8–1.6)), with more words per sentence (mean difference 3.7 (95% CI: 2.4–4.9)), and longer words (mean difference 0.1 (95% CI: 0.03–0.16)). Parents who had higher language complexity experienced less decisional conflict (SMOG vs DCS, r = −0.471, p = 0.004; words per sentence, r = −0.414, p = 0.012; word length, r = −0.419, p = 0.011), but there was no correlation between physician language complexity and DCS or SDM-Q-9 scores. ConclusionPhysicians demonstrated higher language complexity than that of parents in this study. Differences in language complexity between physicians and parents do not appear to play a substantial role in decisional conflict or the perception of shared decision-making in general. However, parents who use a more complex vocabulary may experience less conflict.

Comparing Perceptions and Decisional Conflict Towards Participation in Cancer Clinical Trials Among African American Patients Who Have and Have Not Participated

Despite efforts to increase the diversity of cancer clinical trial participants, African Americans are still underrepresented. While perceptions of participation have been studied, the objective of this study was to compare perceptions and decisional conflict towards clinical trials among African American cancer patients who have and have not participated in clinical trials to identify key areas for intervention. Post hoc analysis also looked at whether they had been asked to participate and how that group differed from those who did. Forty-one African American cancer patients were surveyed at two urban cancer centers and asked to agree/disagree to statements related to clinical trials perceptions (facilitators, barriers, beliefs, values, support, and helpfulness), and complete the O'Connor Decisional Conflict Scale. Independent-samples t tests compared participants by clinical trials participation status; 41% had participated in a clinical trial. Results revealed significant perceptual differences among the groups in three main areas: helpfulness of clinical trials, facilitators to participate in clinical trials, and barriers to participating in clinical trials. Post hoc analysis indicated that those who were not asked about clinical trials and had not participated differed significantly in all areas compared with participants. Additionally, clinical trial participants reported significantly lower decisional conflict in most items compared with both those who had and had not be asked to participate. These differences can give practitioners clues as to how to bridge the gap from non-participator to participator. Messages could then be infused in the clinician-patient dyad when introducing and discussing clinical trials, potentially providing a more effective strategy for communicating with African American patients.

Development of a patient decision aid for treatment resistant depression

Background: Shared decision-making (SDM) involves patients and clinicians choosing treatment jointly. SDM in mental health is hampered by lack of well-developed supporting tools. We describe an evidence-based patient decision aid (PDA) to facilitate SDM for treatment-resistant depression (TRD) following US National Quality Forum standards which are based upon the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS).Methods: A web-based PDA was developed by a multidisciplinary steering committee of clinicians, patient advocates, patients and a decision scientist. Development included creating content consistent with decision-making domains that are impacted by patient preference in TRD. Development was guided by literature review, group conference calls/discussions, patient and clinician interviews (N = 8), high and lower literacy focus groups (N = 11) and pilot study (N = 5). The PDA presents risk-benefit information on domains (e.g., effectiveness, mode of administration, side effects, cost) and includes values clarification exercises. Pilot study patients were administered the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and Decision Self-Efficacy Scale (DSES) prior to and following PDA interaction and clinician SDM.Results: During the pilot, prior to PDA interaction, mean (standard deviation) DCS score was 42.2 (14.4) and DSES score was 86.0 (14.6) out of 100. Following PDA interaction and SDM, DCS decreased (improved) to 28.1 (SD 4.1) and DSES increased to 95.5 (6.7). All patients endorsed that the PDA helped them to: recognize pros and cons of options; understand how treatments were administered, possible side-effects, and likelihood of benefit; recognize what was important relative to the decision; organize thoughts and prepare for a discussion with their clinician.Conclusions: This PDA may support SDM in TRD. A future trial to determine impact of the present SMD on decision-making quality is warranted. It also highlights gaps in comparative effectiveness trials that could guide equitable shared decision-making.

Pre-Abortion Decision-Making Conflict in Pregnant Women Seeking Legal Abortion

BackgroundWoman's decision-making for abortion entails understanding and assessing those options in the context of her unique situation, feelings, aspirations and beliefs. The objective of this study was to examine decision–making conflict and all relevant factors, among women seeking legal abortion authorization letter, referred to Legal Medical Centre in Tehran.Materials and MethodsIn this cross-sectional study, decision-making conflict assessed using the decisional conflict scale (DCS) among 282 pregnant women in their first trimester. Descriptive and logistic regression analyses were undertaken to describe and explore collected data.ResultsEligible women requesting legal abortion were mostly in age group 25-34 years old (50.4% .142, M=31.55, SD=6.1, ranging from 17 - 46 years). They were mostly in gestational age<16 weeks, (212, 75.2%), with average 14.67 (SD=3.51), range 15.0 weeks (4-19 weeks). Some decision conflict (DCS score 25 or greater) was experienced by 182 (64.5%) participants.ConclusionWomen seeking legal abortion may go against their own sense of right and wrong. They deserve pre-abortion consulting to deal with conflict and negative effects in decision-making.

Measuring Self-Efficacy and Readiness for Advance Care Planning in Chinese Older Adults

ContextSelf-efficacy and readiness for advance care planning (ACP) is underresearched in the Chinese population given that these are novel concepts in the culture. ObjectivesTo translate the self-efficacy and readiness subscales of the ACP Engagement Scale into Chinese using the Brislin's Model and test its psychometric properties in Chinese older adults. MethodsContent validity and face validity were established based on the views of a group of experts and older adults. Then, a survey was conducted with a convenience sample of 204 community-dwelling older adults. Convergent validity was evaluated using Pearson's correlation coefficients with the SURE test, a decisional conflict scale. The scores between older adults who had hospitalization experience in the previous year and those who did not have were compared to examine discriminant validity. ResultsThe findings showed that the Chinese subscales had good internal consistency (Cronbach's α 0.94–0.97) and acceptable one-week test-retest reliability (intraclass correlation coefficient 0.66–0.70). There was a significantly high correlation between the self-efficacy and the readiness subscales (r = 0.809; P < 0.01) and moderate correlation between the two subscales and the SURE test (r = 0.509–0.587; P < 0.01). Discriminant validity was supported by significant differences between older adults who had hospitalization experience in the last year and those who did not have (P < 0.05). ConclusionThe Chinese readiness and self-efficacy subscales of the ACP Engagement Survey are valid and reliable tools for assessing the preparedness of the Chinese older adults for ACP.

The Effects of Shared Decision Making on Different Renal Replacement Therapy Decisions in Patients With Chronic Kidney Disease.

The prevalence and incidence of end-stage renal disease (ESRD) in Taiwan are the highest of any country in the world. The different renal replacement therapies that are adopted by patients with ESRD significantly affect their social roles and daily life. However, because of the complexities of different renal replacement therapies, patients may be unsure of which to choose. The aim of this study was to explore the effectiveness of a shared decision-making (SDM) program regarding different renal replacement therapies for patients with chronic kidney disease. A quasi-experimental design was conducted at two similar regional hospitals in Miaoli County, Taiwan. One hospital hosted the intervention group, and the other hospital hosted the control group. The 31 participants in the intervention group took part in a SDM program. The 36 control group participants took part in the pre-ESRD care program. Data collection included demographic and disease characteristics, decisional conflict scale, and decision self-efficacy scale. Results were analyzed using independent t test, Fisher's exact test, generalized estimating equation, and paired t tests. The study results revealed that the intervention group experienced a significant increase in decision self-efficacy and a significant decrease in decisional conflict at 1 month after receiving the SDM intervention in comparison to before and immediately after receiving the intervention. Moreover, the intervention group had higher decision self-efficacy and lower decisional conflict than the control group. The SDM program may be an effective intervention for complex decision-making processes, such as the process involved in making renal replacement treatment decisions. The SDM program group intervention improved decisional conflict and decision self-efficacy. Thus, to improve patients' decision-making processes, the application of an SDM program focused on the personal values and opinions of patients with ESRD will be necessary. Physicians and case managers of patients with ESRD should act in complementary and cooperative roles in SDM programs.

Health-related quality Of Life In patients with advanced Soft TIssue sarcomas treated with Chemotherapy (The HOLISTIC study): protocol for an international observational cohort study.

IntroductionChemotherapy is the mainstay of treatment for patients with advanced soft tissue sarcomas (STS). Treatment intent is usually palliative, aiming to improve symptoms, stabilise or reduce tumour burden and extend life. Clinical trials have traditionally used radiological response, time to progression and survival as measures of treatment efficacy. Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) is at least equally important or more important than survival for many patients with advanced cancer. Systematically collecting HRQoL data during chemotherapy can provide greater insight into treatment efficacy from the patient perspective.The primary aims of this study are to evaluate HRQoL in patients with advanced STS treated with chemotherapy over time, explore the decision-making process and patient reflection post-treatment.Methods and analysisThis is an observational, international cohort study for 132 patients aged ≥18 years with advanced STS treated at eight centres (three in the UK, five in the Netherlands). Patients will be recruited prior to starting first-line or third-line chemotherapy and invited to complete questionnaires using the Patient-Reported Outcomes Following Initial treatment and Long-term Evaluation of Survivorship registry (PROFILES); an established international registry for collection of cancer patient-reported outcomes. Online (or paper) questionnaires will be completed at baseline, each cycle of chemotherapy and 2–3 monthly during follow-up. The questionnaire package includes the Decisional Conflict Scale, Control Preferences Scale, Quality–Quantity Questionnaire, treatment expectations, European Organisation for the Research and Treatment of Cancer Quality of Life Questionnaire Core 30 (EORTC-QLQ-C30), EORTC financial toxicity items, Work Ability Index, Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-General (FACT-G) items and Decisional Regret Scale. Clinical data will be extracted from patient records and linked with questionnaire responses. The primary outcome measure is the change in global HRQoL from baseline to after cycle 4 of first-line chemotherapy (based on published data showing that patients with advanced STS complete a median number of four cycles of first-line chemotherapy).Ethics and disseminationHeath Research Authority and Research Ethics Committee (REC 17/NI/0197). Results from the Health-related quality Of Life In patients with advanced Soft TIssue sarcomas treated with Chemotherapy (HOLISTIC) study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and disseminated at local, national and international conferences. We will also present our findings at any appropriate patient meetings and involve patients in study-related publications.Trial registration numberNCT03621332.

Patients\u2019 perceptions of 70-gene signature testing: commonly changing the initial inclination to undergo or forego chemotherapy and reducing decisional conflict

PurposeLittle is known about the impact of 70-gene signature (70-GS) use on patients’ chemotherapy decision-making. The primary aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of 70-GS use on patients’ decisions to undergo chemotherapy. The perceived decision conflict during decision-making was a secondary objective of the study.MethodsPatients operated for estrogen receptor positive early breast cancer were asked to fill out a questionnaire probing their inclination to undergo chemotherapy before deployment of the 70-GS test. After disclosure of the 70-GS result patients were asked about their decision regarding chemotherapy. Patients’ decisional conflict was measured using the 16-item decisional conflict scale (DCS); scores < 25 are associated with a persuaded decision while a score > 37.5 implies that one feels unsure about a choice.ResultsBetween January 1th 2017 and December 31th 2018, 106 patients completed both questionnaires. Before deployment of the 70-GS, 58% of patients (n = 62) formulated a clear treatment preference, of whom 21 patients (34%) changed their opinion on treatment with chemotherapy following the 70-GS. The final decision regarding chemotherapy was in line with the 70-GS result in 90% of patients. The percentage of patients who felt unsure about their preference to be treated with chemotherapy decreased from 42 to 5% after disclosure of the 70-GS. The mean total DCS significantly decreased from pre-test to post-test from 35 to 23, irrespective of the risk estimate (p < 0.001).ConclusionDeployment of the 70-GS changed patients’ inclination to undergo adjuvant chemotherapy in one third of patients and decreased patients’ decisional conflict.

Unmet expectations in prostate cancer patients and their association with decision regret.

Information about prostate cancer patients' experiences with their treatment is crucial to optimize shared decision-making. This study examined unmet expectations in prostate cancer patients and their association with decision regret. We conducted a prospective, observational, multi-center study of men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer between 2014 and 2016. Questionnaires were completed at baseline (pre-treatment), and up to 12months after treatment. Unmet expectations were reported as the proportion of patients who experienced side effects as worse than expected. Linear regression analysis was used to identify factors associated significantly (p ≤ 0.05) with unmet expectations and its association with decision regret. At 1-year follow-up, the majority of the patients (71%, 210/296) reported at least one unmet expectation. The proportion of patients who reported worse than expected erectile problems was 56%, recovery period = 29%, urinary problems = 28%, fatigue = 24%, and bowel problems = 17%. Unmet expectations were comparable between treatment groups, except for fatigue. A passive role in the decision-making process (eta squared (η2) = 0.02) and higher scores on the decisional conflict scale (η2 = 0.02) were associated with more unmet expectations, and unmet expectations were associated with decision regret (η2 = 0.08). Unmet expectations are common among men treated for localized prostate cancer. Involving patients in the treatment decision-making process and offering additional counseling to patients who indicate uncertainty about their decision, may help to avoid unmet expectations. The current study emphasizes the need for involving prostate cancer patients in the decision-making process in order to mitigate unmet expectations.

20th Anniversary Update of the Ottawa Decision Support Framework: Part 2 Subanalysis of a Systematic Review of Patient Decision Aids.

Background. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) has guided the development of patient decision aids (PtDAs) for 20 years and needs updating across a range of decisions and hypothesized outcomes. Purpose. To determine the effectiveness of ODSF-developed PtDAs on hypothesized outcomes and to recommend framework changes. Data Source. A subanalysis of randomized controlled trials included in the 2017 Cochrane review of PtDAs comparing PtDAs to usual care in adults considering health treatment or screening decisions (searched to 2015). Study Selection. Trials in the original review that evaluated ODSF-developed PtDAs. Data Synthesis. Meta-analyses of ODSF outcomes with similar measurements and descriptions of other reported outcomes. Results. Of 105 trials, 24 evaluated ODSF-developed PtDAs. Compared with usual care, ODSF PtDAs improved knowledge (mean difference [MD] 13.85; 95% confidence interval [CI] 10.32-17.37; 14 trials), increased accurate risk perceptions (risk ratio [RR] 2.41; 95% CI 1.66-3.48; 7 trials), and increased congruence between informed values and chosen options (RR 1.32; 95% CI 1.09-1.59; 4 trials). They reduced perceived decisional needs as measured using the Decisional Conflict Scale (MD -5.92; 95% CI -8.58 to -3.26; 15 trials) and the proportion of undecided patients (RR 0.65; 95% CI 0.50-0.83; 13 trials). Non-ODSF PtDAs, designed with or without a specific framework, also outperformed usual care. Few ODSF trials measured secondary outcomes. Limitations. The included trials had heterogeneity. Conclusion. ODSF PtDAs address decisional needs and improve decision quality; the best indicator of addressing perceived uncertainty is "proportion undecided." Secondary ODSF outcomes should be reduced to adherence to one's chosen option and use/costs of health services, which warrant further research.

Comparison of explicit values clarification method (VCM), implicit VCM and no VCM decision aids for men considering prostate cancer screening: protocol of a randomized trial

BackgroundScreening 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.MethodsMale 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.DiscussionThis 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 registrationNCT03988673 - clinicalTrials.gov (2019/06/17).

Women's decisional conflict in the pathway of prenatal screening and testing: an explorative study within Finnish public maternity care.

Objectives To explore women's decisional conflict in the pathway of prenatal screening and testing (PreST) in Finland and to evaluate a counseling service. Methods Self-completion surveys were conducted at two medical settings (screening and further testing) of PreST. Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) was the main measure. Different types of statistical tests were used to compare women's decisional conflict at different medical settings of PreST, and before-after pre-test counseling. Multivariable linear regressions analyzed the influences of the medical settings and other factors on women's decisional conflict. Results Compared to women in population-based screening, women in further testing (before pre-test counseling) were more likely to feel well informed (P < 0.001), had increased values clarity (P < 0.001), but more likely experienced uncertainty (P = 0.040). Besides medical settings, maternal age, gravidity and previous experience of fetal aneuploidy significantly influenced decisional conflict. After counseling, screen-positive women felt better informed (P < 0.001), had increased values clarity (P < 0.001), perceived more support (P < 0.001), and had better decision certainty (P < 0.001) than before counseling. Conclusions Medical settings influence women's decisional conflict during PreST. Individual counseling is effective in improving screen-positive women's decisional conflict. This research adds knowledge and experience on developing decision-making supports across the pathway of PreST.

Development and Testing of an Adjuvant Radiotherapy Decision Aid for Older Women Diagnosed with Stage I Breast Cancer: A Pilot Study.

BackgroundWhole breast irradiation therapy (WBRT), accelerated partial breast irradiation (APBI), and omission of radiotherapy (ORT) are options for women aged 65 years and older with low-risk breast cancer post lumpectomy.AimThe aim of the study was to develop and pilot a decision aid pamphlet (DA), among women aged 65 years and older with low-risk breast cancer and who were undergoing or had undergone WBRT, to ensure they were fully informed about the different options for radiation treatment following lumpectomy.MethodsWe piloted the decision aid with 40 participants, women aged 65-86 years with low-risk breast cancer and who had undergone or were undergoing WBRT. The women completed a pre-DA Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and post-DA DCS, Knowledge, Preparation for Decision-Making and Acceptability questionnaires. We then used descriptive statistics to compare the DCS scores before and after distributing the decision aid.ResultsThe median age of the 40 participants was 72 years (range, 65-86 years), 38% less than 70, 48% between 70 and 80 and 15% over 80. Ethnicity included 53% Caucasians and the remaining 48% African-Americans, Asians, Europeans, and others. Thirty-three percent completed high school, 25% college/university, and 7.5% elementary education. Seventy-eight percent had T1 and 23% T2 breast cancer. Thirty-three percent completed RT less than one year prior to the study, 30% between one to two years, and 38% greater than two years. The median pre-DA DCS score was 31.2 (31.2-90.6), and the median post-DA DCS score was 23.4 (0-75.0). Six (6/40) patients scored 0 on the DCS post intervention, while 13 (13/40) scored less than 15.6. The median knowledge score was 70%. Preparation for decision-making median score was 90%. Ninety-nine percent stated that the DA was useful for future patients. ConclusionWe piloted a DA that aimed to provide the necessary information for women aged 65 years and older with low-risk breast cancer, to understand radiation treatment options post lumpectomy. The results obtained from the study highlighted the utility of the DA in increasing patient comprehension about the different treatment options, reducing decisional conflict in terms of perceptions of uncertainty and preparing patients to engage with their radiation oncologist during the treatment decision-making process. Ultimately, this study promoted the importance of patient-centered care in geriatric oncology by piloting this DA to see its effectiveness while also being responsive to patient’s thoughts regarding the tool, so as to have their values guide its further development.

Abstract 14: Decision Aid For Women With Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Seeking Breast Reconstruction Surgery: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled, Single-blinded, Pilot Study

Purpose: Women undergoing immediate mastectomy for breast cancer often experience anxiety when faced with breast reconstruction and the type of reconstruction to choose. The purpose of this study is to analyze the impact of a decision aid on decisional conflict in women with newly diagnosed breast cancer seeking breast reconstruction. Methods: Thirty-three newly diagnosed breast cancer patients seeking breast reconstruction at a single-center were prospectively randomized into two groups. Comparisons were made between two groups using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS): women who reviewed the standard educational materials prior to initial consultation (control) and women who reviewed standard materials prior to initial consultation and then reviewed a decision aid brochure at initial consultation and two weeks post-consultation (intervention). Differences between pre-to-post-consultation DCS scores, and DCS scores two weeks post-consultation in the control groups and intervention groups were compared to assess which group had lower DCS scores. Results: A total of 20 patients, mean age 53±9 years were included. Median differences between pre-to-post-consultation DCS Total scores in the control and intervention groups lowered from 32 to 22 and 28 to 16, respectively. Significant differences in subscores were control group: Uncertainty: 54 to 21 (p=0.030), and intervention group: Uncertainty: 46 to 29(p=0.036) and Values clarity: 29 to 25 (p=0.042). Differences between DCS scores and subscores two weeks post-consultation did not demonstrate statistical significance. Conclusions: Decision aids did not significantly reduce pre-operative DCS scores compared to current educational materials. Patients receiving the decision aid felt they clearly understood what reconstruction option meant most to them prior to surgery.

20th Anniversary Ottawa Decision Support Framework: Part 3 Overview of Systematic Reviews and Updated Framework

Introduction. The Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF) has guided practitioners and patients facing difficult decisions for 20 years. It asserts that decision support interventions that address patients' decisional needs improve decision quality. Purpose. To update the ODSF based on a synthesis of evidence. Methods. We conducted an overview of systematic reviews, searching 9 electronic databases. Eligible reviews included decisional needs assessments, decision support interventions, and decisional outcome measures guided by the ODSF. We extracted data and synthesized results narratively. Eight ODSF developers/expert users from 4 disciplines revised the ODSF. Results. Of 4656 citations, we identified 4 eligible reviews (>250 studies, >100 different decisions, >50,000 patients, 18 countries, 5 continents). They reported current ODSF decisional needs and their most frequent manifestations in the areas of inadequate knowledge/information, unclear values, decisional conflict/uncertainty, and inadequate support. They uncovered 11 new manifestations of 6 decisional needs. Using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) to assess decisional needs, average scores were elevated at baseline and declined shortly after decision making, even without information interventions. Patient decision aids were superior to usual care in reducing total DCS scores and improving decision quality. We revised the ODSF by refining definitions of 6 decisional needs and adding new interventions to address 4 needs. We added a decision process outcome and eliminated secondary outcomes unlikely to improve across a range of decisions, retaining the implementation/continuance of the chosen option and appropriate use/costs of health services. Conclusions. We updated the ODSF to reflect the current evidence and identified implications for practice and further research.

How does physicians’ decisional conflict influence their ability to address treatment outcomes in a decision-making encounter with an advanced-stage cancer simulated patient? A descriptive study

ObjectivesThis descriptive study assesses how physicians’ decisional conflict influences their ability to address treatment outcomes (TOs) in a decision-making encounter with an advanced-stage cancer simulated patient (SP). MethodsPhysicians (N = 138) performed a decision-making encounter with the SP trained to ask for TOs information. The physicians’ decisional conflict regarding patients’ cancer treatments in general was assessed with the General Decisional Conflict Scale (Gen-DCS). The physicians’ decisional conflict regarding the SP’s cancer treatments was assessed with the Specific Decisional Conflict Scale (Spe-DCS). Physicians’ ability to address TOs during the encounter was assessed with an interaction analysis system: the Multi-Dimensional Analysis of Patient Outcome Predictions (MD.POP). Weekly time spent with cancer patients was assessed with a questionnaire. ResultsPhysicians’ Spe-DCS (β = -.21 ; p = .014) and weekly time spent with cancer patients (β = .22 ; p = .008) predicted the number of TOs addressed during the encounter. Spe-DCS scores predicted nearly all MD.POP dimensions (r = -.18 ; p = .040 to r = -.30 to p < .001) whereas Gen-DCS scores predicted nearly none MD.POP dimensions. ConclusionPhysicians’ specific decisional conflict interferes with their ability to address TOs in a decision-making encounter with an advanced-stage cancer SP. Practice implicationsPhysicians should be trained to address TOs according to patient preferences, despite their own decisional conflict.

Decision-making in HIV clinical trials: a study with patients enrolled in antiretroviral trials

ObjectiveTo explore the decisional process of people living with human immunodeficiency virus (HIV) currently enrolled in antiretroviral clinical trials. MethodCross-sectional retrospective study. Outcome variables were reasons to participate, perceived decisional role (Control Preference Scale), the Decisional Conflict Scale and the Decisional Regret Scale. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and associations among these variables and with sociodemographic and clinical characteristics were analyzed with non-parametric techniques. ResultsMain reasons to participate were gratitude towards Fundación Huesped (47%), the doctor's recommendation (32%), and perceived difficulty to access treatment in a public hospital (28%). Most patients thought that they made their decision alone (54.8%) or collaboratively with the physician (43%). Decisional conflict was low, with only some conflict in the support subscale (median=16.67). Education was the only significant correlate of the total decisional conflict score (higher in less educated patients; p=0.018), whereas education, recent diagnosis, living alone, lower age, being man and doctor's recommendation to go to Fundación Huésped related to higher conflict in different subscales. Nobody regretted to participate. ConclusionsThe decision making regarding participation in HIV trials, from the perspective of participants, was made respecting their autonomy and with very low decisional conflict. Currently, patients show no signs of regret. However, even in this favorable context, results highlight the necessity of enhancing the decision support in more vulnerable patients (e.g., less educated, recently diagnosed or with less social support), thus warranting equity in the quality of the decision making process.

Decisional conflict among couples seeking specialty treatment for infertility in the USA: a longitudinal exploratory study

What are couples' decisional conflicts around family-building approaches before and after seeking a specialty consultation for infertility? Decisional conflict is high among couples before an initial specialty consultation for infertility; on average, women resolved decisional conflict more quickly than men. Couples have multiple options for addressing infertility, and decisional conflict may arise due to lack of information, uncertainty about options and potential risks or challenges to personal values. We conducted a total of 385 interviews and 405 surveys for this longitudinal, mixed-methods cohort study of 34 opposite-sex couples who sought a new reproductive specialty consultation (n= 68), who enrolled before the initial consultation and were followed over 12months. The in-depth, semi-structured interviews included questions about information gathering, deliberation and decision-making, and self-administered surveys included the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), at six time points over 12months. A DCS total score of 25 is associated with implementing a decision, and higher scores indicate more decisional conflict. A systematic content analysis of interview transcripts identified major themes. Paired t tests identified differences in DCS between women and men within couples. Linear mixed models predicted changes in DCS over time, adjusting for sociodemographic and fertility-related factors. The major qualitative themes were communication with partners, feeling supported and/or pressured in decision (s), changing decisions over time and ability to execute a desired decision. Average DCS scores were highest before the initial consultation. Within couples, men had significantly higher decisional conflict than women pre-consultation (48.9 versus 40.2, P= 0.037) and at 2months (28.9 versus 22.1, P= 0.015), but differences at other time points were not significant. In adjusted models, predicted DCS scores declined over time, with women, on average, reaching the DCS threshold for implementing a decision at 2months while for men it was not until 4months. This is a convenience sample from a single center, and generalizability may be limited. Understanding how couples discuss and make decisions regarding family-building could improve the delivery of patient-centered infertility care. Our findings are the first to prospectively explore decisional conflict at multiple time points in both men and women; the observed gender differences underlie the importance of supporting both partners in clinical decision-making for infertility. This work was supported by the National Institute of Child Health and Human Development under Grant [R21HD071332], the Research and Education Program Fund, of the Advancing a Healthier Wisconsin endowment at Medical College of Wisconsin, the National Research Service Award under Grant [T32 HP10030] and the use of REDCap for data collection from the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences, National Institutes of Health under Grant through [8UL1TR000055]. The authors have no competing interests.