Decisional Conflict Scale Scores Research Articles

Feasibility and Acceptability of a Palliative Care Intervention Among Older or Adults with Advanced CKD and their Caregivers.

In non-nephrology settings, specialty Palliative Care (PC) improves decision-making, patient's quality of life (QoL), advance care planning (ACP), and certain indicators of the quality of end-of-life (EoL) care. This pilot RCT explored the feasibility and acceptability of a PC intervention, CKD-EDU, for older adults ≥75 years with eGFR ≤25 ml/min and their caregivers. Participants randomized to the control group received standard nephrology care and routine kidney therapy (KT) education, while those randomized to CKD-EDU received a decision aid and met with a PC clinician up to three times to discuss KT decisions and EoL planning. Patients were assessed at baseline, 4-6, 12-14, and 24-26 weeks. Main outcomes included intervention feasibility and acceptability, decision-conflict, and patient QoL. The mediating effects of reduced decision conflict on improved QOL were explored, as were the effects of CKD-EDU on ACP, EoL treatment intensity and 6-month-hospitalization. Statistical analyses encompassed descriptive analyses, adjusted repeated-measure-models, mediation analyses and logistic-regression models. Among the 127 eligible patients screened, 58 (44%) consented: 30 were randomized to CKD-EUD and 28 to the control arm. All patients completed baseline assessments, and 89% completed at least one intervention session (n=26/29), underscoring intervention adherence and feasibility. Similarly, assessments completion rates at 4 (83%, n=45/54) ), 12 (93%, n=42/45), and 24 (95%, n=40/42) weeks were high. The intervention received over 85% acceptability ratings for all questions. Patients exposed to CKD-EDU exhibited significant improvement in decisional conflict scale scores (P = 0.003) at 4-6 weeks and improvements in QoL at 24-26 weeks (P=0.02). Exploratory analyses were not statistically significant in this pilot, but all effect sizes were in the predicted direction. This study demonstrates the feasibility and acceptability of CKD-EDU. A larger scale trial is warranted to assess its effectiveness in improving key outcomes important to patients and families.

Changes in Outcomes Expectations During the Cochlear Implant Evaluation Process.

Patient expectations are a critical factor in determining cochlear implant (CI) candidacy. However, minimal data are available on how potential CI recipients develop their expectations and if expectations can be modified by providers. In addition, there is little insight into the resources patients use to inform their decision to undergo implantation. This project aims to assess (1) the role of the CI evaluation (CIE) process on patients' expectations, (2) the extent to which patients' pre-CI outcome expectations can be modified, (3) the information patients use to inform their expectations, and patients' preferences for the discussion/display of potential CI outcomes. Prospective mixed methods study of 32 adult CI patients undergoing CIEs. Outcome measures included: pre-CI Cochlear Implant Quality of Life-35 Profile scores (CIQOL-35 Profile); pre-CIE/post-CIE/day of surgery CIQOL-Expectations scores; post-CIE/day of surgery Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) scores; and pre-CI aided CNC-word and AzBio sentence scores. Thematic analyses of key informant interviews with 19 potential CI recipients were also performed. In aim 1, CI CIQOL-Expectation domain scores remained essentially unchanged following the CIE when averaged across all participants (d = 0.01 to 0.17). However, changes in expectations were observed for many participants at the individual level. Regarding the second aim, participants with higher pre-CIE expectations showed a decrease in expectations following the CIE for all CIQOL domains except emotional and social (d = -0.27 to -0.77). In contrast, the only significant change in participants with lower expectations was an increase in expectations in the environment score from pre-CIE to the day of surgery (d = 0.76). Expectations remained essentially unchanged or continued to change in the same direction between the post-CIE and the day of surgery, narrowing the gap between participants with higher and lower expectations. Overall, participants demonstrated low overall conflict related to their decision to proceed with cochlear implantation (mean DCS of 11.4 post-CIE and 14.2 at time of surgery out of 100) but DCS scores were higher for participants with lower pre-CIE expectations (d = 0.71). In aim 3, key informant interviews demonstrated no differences between the low- and high expectation cohorts regarding resources used to develop their perception of CI outcomes. Potential CI recipients placed high value in talking with patients who had previously received a CI, and preferred discussing CI functional abilities via clinical vignettes described in the CIQOL Functional Staging System rather than by discussing speech recognition or CIQOL-35 Profile scores. The results of the present study suggest that, although overall expectations averaged across the cohort remained essentially unchanged, individual participants' pre-CI expectations can be modified and there is value in measuring these expectations using the CIQOL-Expectations tool to determine if they are realistic. This information can then be utilized during personalized counseling to present a more accurate representation of likely CI outcomes for each patient. Discussions between potential CI recipients and current CI users may also provide valuable information to inform their expectations. In addition, communicating potential CI benefits using CIQOL functional stages and associated clinical vignettes may result in more realistic patient expectations and support shared decision-making related to CI surgery.

A person-centred consultation intervention to improve shared decision-making about, and uptake of, osteoporosis medicines (iFraP): a pragmatic, parallel-group, individual randomised controlled trial protocol

Background Good quality shared decision-making (SDM) conversations involve people with, or at risk of osteoporosis and clinicians collaborating to decide, where appropriate, which evidence-based medicines best fit the person’s life, beliefs, and values. We developed the improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments (iFraP) intervention comprising a computerised Decision Support Tool (DST), clinician training package and information resources, for use in UK Fracture Liaison Service consultations. Two primary objectives to determine (1) the effect of the iFraP intervention on patient-reported ease in decision-making about osteoporosis medicines, and (2) cost-effectiveness of iFraP intervention compared to usual NHS care. Secondary objectives are to determine the iFraP intervention effect on patient reported outcome and experience measures, clinical effectiveness (osteoporosis medicine adherence), and to explore intervention acceptability, mechanisms, and processes underlying observed effects, and intervention implementation. Methods The iFraP trial is a pragmatic, parallel-group, individual randomised controlled trial in patients referred to a Fracture Liaison Service, with nested mixed methods process evaluation and health economic analysis. Participants aged ≥50 years (n=380) are randomised (1:1 ratio) to one of two arms: (1) iFraP intervention (iFraP-i) or (2) comparator usual NHS care (iFraP-u) and are followed up at 2-weeks and 3-months. The primary outcome is ease of decision-making assessed 2 weeks after the consultation using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). The primary objectives will be addressed by comparing the mean DCS score in each trial arm (using analysis of covariance) for patients given an osteoporosis medicine recommendation, alongside a within-trial cost-effectiveness and value of information (VoI) analysis. Process evaluation data collection includes consultation recordings, semi-structured interviews, and DST analytics. Discussion The iFraP trial will answer important questions about the effectiveness of the new ‘iFraP’ osteoporosis DST, coupled with clinician training, on SDM and informed initiation of osteoporosis medicines. Trial registration ISRCTN 10606407, 21/11/2022 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN10606407

Association between genetic information provision and decisional conflict in patients with cancer.

227 Background: The decisional conflict scale (DCS) measures personal perception of uncertainty when facing a decision. In patients with cancer, decision conflict is likely when considering uncertainty in oncologic systemic treatment outcomes. Cancer genomic information can introduce more uncertainty and complexity in care. This study aims to evaluate patients’ DCS score pre or post discussing next generation sequencing (NGS) results with a medical oncologist, and assess factors that correlate with high decision conflict. Methods: Patients diagnosed with incurable/metastatic cancer who underwent molecular characterization with tissue+/- liquid NGS testing were enrolled. Survey instruments included the validated DCS (five subscales: informed, values clarity, support, uncertainty, effective decision), and EQ-5D-5L. DCS was administered pre or post medical oncology consultation that included review of tissue +/- liquid NGS results and treatment options. Higher DCS score correlates with higher perception of uncertainty. Descriptive statistics were used to assess clinical and demographic risk factors. Multivariable logistic regression analysis estimated the correlation between high DCS and clinical factors. Results: 335 DCS surveys were completed by 227 patients: 188 before and 147 after discussing tissue+/- liquid NGS results with a medical oncologist. Baseline characteristics: 56% female, median age 65, ECOG 0-1 58%, median EQ5D VAS score 68, GI/lung/gyne/breast/other 42/32/10/5/11%, white/Asian/other/unknown 66/12/5/17%. Tier 1 variants were identified in 35% of patients. Patients reported decreased decision conflict after consultation. Multivariable logistic regression analysis including sex, age, race and tumor group did not predict for high DCS pre-consultation. MVA post NGS results that also included Tier 1 variants (present / absent) did not predict for high DSC post consultation. Conclusions: Communication regarding genomic-based tumor assessment can positively support patients in decision conflict, and improve their confidence in their treatment choice, regardless of the findings of the report. Low DCS after consultation supports the goal of shared decision making for cancer treatment. Clinical trial information: NCT05057234 . DCS subscale Pre-consultation Post-consultation p value Informed 49.3 37.5 <0.001 Values clarity 45.3 35.5 <0.001 Support 34.4 28.2 0.005 Uncertainty 46.8 36.1 <0.001 Effective decision 40.0 31.4 <0.001 TOTAL 42.9 33.6 <0.001

Prolapse Treatment-Related Decisional Conflict After New Patient Visits.

Patients with pelvic organ prolapse are often tasked with deciding between treatments. Decisional conflict is a measure of factors that go into effective decision making. This study aimed to compare prolapse treatment-related decisional conflict reported by underrepresented patients (URPs) to non-URPs after new patient visits. A multicenter cohort study of new patients counseled regarding management of prolapse from July 2021 to December 2022 was performed. Participants completed the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), a validated measure of modifiable factors in decision making. Higher scores indicate feeling less comfortable with decisions. Race and ethnicity were viewed as social constructs. A URP was defined as self-identification with a non-White race or Hispanic ethnicity. Alpha was set at 0.05, power 80%, to detect an effect size of 0.4 between mean DCS scores. A total of 207 participants (103 URPs, 49.8%), with a mean age of 63.4 ± 11.9 years and mean body mass index of 29.7 ± 6.9 (calculated as weight in kilograms divided by height in meters squared), completed the study. Much of the URP group self-identified as Hispanic (50/103, 48.5%) and/or Black (39/103, 37.9%), and 30 of 103 (29.1%) had an interpreter at their visit. A greater proportion of non-URPs had a prior hysterectomy (16.1% difference; P = 0.017) and prolapse surgery (18/204, 10.5% difference; P = 0.020). A greater proportion of URPs had hypertension (23.6% difference; P = <0.001). There were no differences in the other pelvic floor disorders, prolapse stage, or treatments selected (all P > 0.05). The mean DCS scores were not different between groups (URP, 12.9 ± 12.3 vs non-URP, 11.6 ± 14.9; P = 0.31). Household income, education, and insurance were not associated with DCS scores (all P > 0.05). Decisional Conflict Scale scores were not significantly different between groups. Possible differences between subgroups warrant further investigation.

Validation of a checklist to facilitate serious illness conversations in adult emergency in China: a single-centre pilot study

BackgroundAdvances in emergency and critical care have improved outcomes, but gaps in communication and decision-making persist, especially in the emergency department (ED), prompting the development of a checklist to aid in serious illness conversations (SIC) in China.MethodsThis was a single-centre prospective interventional study on the quality improvement of SIC for life-sustaining treatment (LST). The study recruited patients consecutively for both its observational baseline and interventional stages until its conclusion. Eligible participants were adults over 18 years old admitted to the Emergency Intensive Care Unit (EICU) of a tertiary teaching hospital, possessing full decisional capacity or having a legal proxy. Exclusions were made for pregnant women, patients deceased upon arrival, those who refused participation, and individuals with incomplete data for analysis. First, a two-round Delphi process was organized to identify major elements and generate a standard process through a checklist. Subsequently, the efficacy of SIC in adult patients admitted to the EICU was compared using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) score before (baseline group) and after (intervention group) implementing the checklist.ResultsThe study participants presented with the most common comorbidities, such as diabetes, myocardial infarction, cerebrovascular disease, moderate-to-severe renal disease, congestive heart failure, and chronic pulmonary disease. The median Charlson Index did not differ between the baseline and intervention cohorts. The median length of hospital stay was 11.0 days, and 82.9% of patients survived until hospital discharge. The total DCS score was lower in the intervention group than in the baseline group. Three subscales, including the informed, values clarity, and support subscales, demonstrated significant differences between the intervention and baseline groups. Fewer intervention group patients agreed with and changed their minds about cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) compared to the baseline group.ConclusionThe use of a SIC checklist in the EICU reduced the DCS score by increasing medical information disclosure, patient value awareness, and decision-making support.

Decision Regret and Decision-Making Process among Caregivers of Older Adults Receiving Home Care: A Cross-Sectional Study

ObjectivesFamily caregivers of older adults receiving home care often find themselves in situations in which they must make important and difficult decisions, which can cause conflict and regret. To tailor shared decision making in this context, we aimed to identify the most difficult decisions they faced, assess their levels of decision regret, and explore the associated factors. DesignThis study used a cross-sectional design. Setting and ParticipantsParticipants included 165 caregivers of older adults who received home care services in Korea. MethodsWe identified difficult decisions perceived by family caregivers of older adults and evaluated decision regret using the Decision Regret Scale (DRS), decisional conflict using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), burden of care using the Short Zarit Burden Inventory, and Preference Control Scale (PCS). We then performed descriptive, bivariate, and multivariate linear regression analyses to identify factors predicting decision regret. ResultsThe most frequently reported difficult decisions were related to place of living (71.6%), management of health conditions (15.1%), and end-of-life decisions (13.3%). The mean DCS score was 37.09 (12.67), the DRS score was 32.33 (15.91), and the burden score was 21.81 (8.25). Matching decisions with preferences and aligning decision-making roles significantly reduced regret, while decision conflicts increased regret. Conclusions and ImplicationsThe positive associations between decision regret, decision conflict, and the alignment of decision-making roles highlight the intricate dynamics involved in the decision-making process for family caregivers. These findings emphasize the need for tailored interventions that recognize and address the diverse factors influencing caregivers’ decision-making experiences. Future research exploring the efficacy of targeted interventions such as decision-support programs or caregiver education initiatives could offer valuable insights into mitigating decision-related challenges and improving the overall well-being of both caregivers and care recipients.

Depression and Implantable Cardioverter-Defibrillator Implantation in Black Patients at Risk for Sudden Cardiac Death.

Black patients meeting indications for implantable cardioverter-defibrillators (ICDs) have lower rates of implantation compared with White patients. There is little understanding of how mental health impacts the decision-making process among Black patients considering ICDs. Our objective was to assess the association between depressive symptoms and ICD implantation among Black patients with heart failure. This is a secondary analysis of the VIVID (Videos to Address Racial Disparities in ICD Therapy via Innovative Designs) randomized trial, which enrolled self-identified Black individuals with chronic systolic heart failure. Depressive symptoms were assessed by the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 and the Mental Component Summary of the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey. Decisional conflict was measured by an adapted Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). ANCOVA was used to assess differences in Decisional Conflict Scale scores. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between depressive symptoms and ICD implantation. Among 306 participants, 60 (19.6%) reported depressed mood, and 142 (46.4%) reported anhedonia. Participants with the lowest Mental Component Summary of the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores (poorer mental health and higher likelihood of depression) had greater decisional conflict regarding ICD implantation compared with those with the highest Mental Component Summary of the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey scores (adjusted mean difference in Decisional Conflict Scale score, 3.2 [95% CI, 0.5-5.9]). By 90-day follow-up, 202 (66.0%) participants underwent ICD implantation. There was no association between either the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 score or the Mental Component Summary of the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey score and ICD implantation. Depressed mood and anhedonia were prevalent among ambulatory Black patients with chronic systolic heart failure considering ICD implantation. The presence of depressive symptoms did not impact the likelihood of ICD implantation in this population.

Eggsurance? A randomized controlled trial of a decision aid for elective egg freezing.

Does a purpose-designed Decision Aid for women considering elective egg freezing (EEF) impact decisional conflict and other decision-related outcomes? The Decision Aid reduces decisional conflict, prepares women for decision-making, and does not cause distress. Elective egg-freezing decisions are complex, with 78% of women reporting high decisional conflict. Decision Aids are used to support complex health decisions. We developed an online Decision Aid for women considering EEF and demonstrated that it was acceptable and useful in Phase 1 testing. A single-blind, two-arm parallel group randomized controlled trial was carried out. Target sample size was 286 participants. Randomization was 1:1 to the control (existing website information) or intervention (Decision Aid plus existing website information) group and stratified by Australian state/territory and prior IVF specialist consultation. Participants were recruited between September 2020 and March 2021 with outcomes recorded over 12 months. Data were collected using online surveys and data collection was completed in March 2022. Females aged ≥18 years, living in Australia, considering EEF, proficient in English, and with internet access were recruited using multiple methods including social media posts, Google advertising, newsletter/noticeboard posts, and fertility clinic promotion. After completing the baseline survey, participants were emailed their allocated website link(s). Follow-up surveys were sent at 6 and 12 months. Primary outcome was decisional conflict (Decisional Conflict Scale). Other outcomes included distress (Depression Anxiety and Stress Scale), knowledge about egg freezing and female age-related infertility (study-specific measure), whether a decision was made, preparedness to decide about egg freezing (Preparation for Decision-Making Scale), informed choice (Multi-Dimensional Measure of Informed Choice), and decision regret (Decision Regret Scale). Overall, 306 participants (mean age 30 years; SD: 5.2) were randomized (intervention n = 150, control n = 156). Decisional Conflict Scale scores were significantly lower at 12 months (mean score difference: -6.99 [95% CI: -12.96, -1.02], P = 0.022) for the intervention versus control group after adjusting for baseline decisional conflict. At 6 months, the intervention group felt significantly more prepared to decide about EEF than the control (mean score difference: 9.22 [95% CI: 2.35, 16.08], P = 0.009). At 12 months, no group differences were observed in distress (mean score difference: 0.61 [95% CI: -3.72, 4.93], P = 0.783), knowledge (mean score difference: 0.23 [95% CI: -0.21, 0.66], P = 0.309), or whether a decision was made (relative risk: 1.21 [95% CI: 0.90, 1.64], P = 0.212). No group differences were found in informed choice (relative risk: 1.00 [95% CI: 0.81, 1.25], P = 0.983) or decision regret (median score difference: -5.00 [95% CI: -15.30, 5.30], P = 0.337) amongst participants who had decided about EEF by 12 months (intervention n = 48, control n = 45). Unknown participant uptake and potential sampling bias due to the recruitment methods used and restrictions caused by the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic. Some outcomes had small sample sizes limiting the inferences made. The use of study-specific or adapted validated measures may impact the reliability of some results. This is the first randomized controlled trial to evaluate a Decision Aid for EEF. The Decision Aid reduced decisional conflict and improved women's preparation for decision making. The tool will be made publicly available and can be tailored for international use. The Decision Aid was developed with funding from the Royal Women's Hospital Foundation and McBain Family Trust. The study was funded by a National Health and Medical Research Council (NHMRC) Project Grant APP1163202, awarded to M. Hickey, M. Peate, R.J. Norman, and R. Hart (2019-2021). S.S., M.P., D.K., and S.B. were supported by the NHMRC Project Grant APP1163202 to perform this work. R.H. is Medical Director of Fertility Specialists of Western Australia and National Medical Director of City Fertility. He has received grants from MSD, Merck-Serono, and Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study and is a shareholder of CHA-SMG. R.L. is Director of Women's Health Melbourne (Medical Practice), ANZSREI Executive Secretary (Honorary), RANZCOG CREI Subspecialty Committee Member (Honorary), and a Fertility Specialist at Life Fertility Clinic Melbourne and Royal Women's Hospital Public Fertility Service. R.A.A. has received grants from Ferring Pharmaceuticals unrelated to this study. M.H., K.H., and R.J.N. have no conflicts to declare. ACTRN12620001032943. 11 August 2020. 29 September 2020.

A pilot randomized controlled study to determine the effectiveness of video educational tool in BRCA1/2 pre‐test counseling for Japanese breast cancer patients

AbstractBRCA1/2 genetic testing has become clinically important in breast cancer care, but increasing demand may put a burden on the shortage of healthcare professionals. We performed a single‐center, pilot randomized controlled study to assess the effectiveness of employing a video educational tool that included standard pre‐test genetic counseling elements related to BRCA1/2. Patients with operable breast cancer who met the criteria for genetic testing based on age, sex, subtype, and family history were recruited. Sixty consenting participants were randomized 1:1 and placed in groups that received either traditional face‐to‐face pre‐test counseling or video‐viewing and face‐to‐face decisional support. To assess decisional conflict in the participants, surveys based on the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) were administered two times, once immediately after intervention and again 2–4 weeks later. The time taken for counseling and confirmation of whether the participants had undergone testing were also recorded. The difference in the total DCS scores between the two groups was not significantly different for either of the survey periods, and there was no significant difference in the number of participants who underwent testing (23/30 [76.7%] vs. 26/30 [86.7%]; p = 0.51). However, the “effective decision” subscale score was significantly higher in the video group 2–4 weeks after counseling (31.01 ± 16.82 vs. 21.43 ± 16.09; p = 0.04 [mean ± SD]). The time taken for counseling was significantly shorter in the video group (8.00 ± 4.5 vs. 27.00 ± 7.61 min; p &lt; 0.001 [median ± SD]). Our findings indicate the potential benefit of the video educational tool for providing BRCA1/2‐related information. These tools may also enable healthcare professionals to spend more time supporting psychological issues. Notably, after some time, patients may question whether their decision was appropriate. Therefore, it is necessary to identify those in conflict and provide them with proper support.

Decisional Conflict Among Patients Newly Diagnosed With Clinical T1 Renal Masses: A Prospective Study.

Because multiple management options exist for clinical T1 renal masses, patients may experience a state of uncertainty about the course of action to pursue (ie, decisional conflict). To better support patients, we examined patient, clinical, and decision-making factors associated with decisional conflict among patients newly diagnosed with clinical T1 renal masses suspicious for kidney cancer. From a prospective clinical trial, participants completed the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS), scored 0 to 100 with < 25 associated with implementing decisions, at 2 time points during the initial decision-making period. The trial further characterized patient demographics, health status, tumor burden, and patient-centered communication, while a subcohort completed additional questionnaires on decision-making. Associations of patient, clinical, and decision-making factors with DCS scores were evaluated using generalized estimating equations to account for repeated measures per patient. Of 274 enrollees, 250 completed a DCS survey; 74% had masses ≤ 4 cm in size, while 11% had high-complexity tumors. Model-based estimated mean DCS score across both time points was 17.6 (95% CI 16.0-19.3), though 50% reported a DCS score ≥ 25 at least once. On multivariable analysis, DCS scores increased with age (+2.64, 95% CI 1.04-4.23), high- vs low-complexity tumors (+6.50, 95% CI 0.35-12.65), and cystic vs solid masses (+9.78, 95% CI 5.27-14.28). Among decision-making factors, DCS scores decreased with higher self-efficacy (-3.31, 95% CI -5.77 to -0.86]) and information-seeking behavior (-4.44, 95% CI -7.32 to -1.56). DCS scores decreased with higher patient-centered communication scores (-8.89, 95% CI -11.85 to -5.94). In addition to patient and clinical factors, decision-making factors and patient-centered communication relate with decisional conflict, highlighting potential avenues to better support patient decision-making for clinical T1 renal masses.

Abstract PO3-11-11: Reproductive concerns of Japanese young women with breast cancer: a longitudinal study

Abstract Background: Treatment-related infertility is one of the major concerns of young women with breast cancer. We explored the longitudinal change and factors associated with reproductive concerns of Japanese young women in a prospective cohort study. Method: Women under the age of forty with newly diagnosed, histologically confirmed, operable breast cancer were recruited to “Hope for YBC Project” (UMIN000034481). The participants were asked to respond to anonymous self-written questionnaire regarding reproductive concern, anxiety and depression, perception of motherhood and socio-economic status at baseline and 6M. Result: Among 215 participants who were enrolled in the study, the mean age of 143 participants who responded to both the questionnaire at baseline and 6M was 35.7 (range 25-39): 78 (54.5%) had a university degree or higher, 104 (72.7%) had a partner, 65 (45.5%) had more than one child, and 84 (58.8%) had a household income more than 5 million yen. 57 (39.9%) had desire for having a baby, 37 (25.9%) were unsure and 43 (33.6%) were not interested. Among 143, 33 (23%) attempted fertility preservation. Baseline score of Reproductive Concerns After Cancer scale (RCAC) had weak correlation with the total scores of Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale (HADS) (r=.397, p&amp;lt; .001) and Decision Conflict Scale (DCS) (r=.365, p&amp;lt; .001), respectively. Perceived “sufficient explanation of the risk of recurrence” and “sufficient explanation of the necessity and benefit of pharmacotherapy” were significantly associated with reduced DCS score at baseline (p&amp;lt; 0.001). The desire for having a baby changed in 15 women (10.5%) at 6M. Although both DCS and HADS significantly lowered at 6M, there was no difference between RCAC score at baseline and at 6M. RCAC score at 6M had correlation with RCAC(r=.793, p&amp;lt; .001), DCS(r=.439, p&amp;lt; .001), and HADS (r=.401, p&amp;lt; .001) scores at baseline. RCAC score at 6M was also associated with younger age (r=.311), non-existence of partner (p=.001), non-existence of child (p=.014), desire for having a baby (p&amp;lt; .001) at baseline, attempt of fertility preservation (p=.025) and not receiving endocrine treatment (p=.047). Conclusion: Reproductive concerns of young women remained throughout the treatment, and concerns at later treatment phase were associated with decision conflict and anxiety at diagnosis. These results shows that young women, especially those who have higher risk of having reproductive concern, need psychological and decision support at diagnosis, including thorough explanation of risk of recurrence and benefit of systemic treatment from oncologists. Citation Format: Chie Watanabe, Hiroko Bando, Akemi Kataoka, Mai Okazaki, Tadahiko Shien, Eriko Tokunaga, Takashi Kuwayama, Chikako Shimizu. Reproductive concerns of Japanese young women with breast cancer: a longitudinal study [abstract]. In: Proceedings of the 2023 San Antonio Breast Cancer Symposium; 2023 Dec 5-9; San Antonio, TX. Philadelphia (PA): AACR; Cancer Res 2024;84(9 Suppl):Abstract nr PO3-11-11.

Exploring Decisional Conflict Experienced by Individuals Considering Metoidioplasty and Phalloplasty Gender-affirming Surgery.

Metoidioplasty and phalloplasty gender-affirming surgery (MaPGAS) is increasingly performed and requires patients to make complex decisions that may lead to decisional uncertainty. This study aimed to evaluate decisional conflict in individuals considering MaPGAS. We administered a cross-sectional survey to adult participants assigned female sex at birth and considering MaPGAS, recruited via social media platforms and community health centers. We collected data on demographics, medical and surgical history, MaPGAS type considered, and the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). DCS scores range from 0 to 100 (>37.5 indicates greater decisional conflict). Demographic characteristics and DCS scores were compared between subgroups, using descriptive and chi-square statistics. Participants commented on MaPGAS uncertainty, and their comments were evaluated and thematically analyzed. Responses from 264 participants were analyzed: mean age 29 years; 64% (n = 168) trans men, 80% (n = 210) White, 78% (n = 206) nonrural, 45% (n = 120) privately insured, 56% (n = 148) had 4 or more years of college, 23% (n = 84) considering metoidioplasty, 24% (n = 87) considering phalloplasty, and 26% (n = 93) considering metoidioplasty and phalloplasty. DCS total scores were significantly higher (39.8; P < 0.001) among those considering both MaPGAS options, as were mean ratings on the Uncertainty subscale [64.1 (SD 25.5; P < 0.001)]. Concerns surrounding complications were the top factor contributing to uncertainty and decisional conflict. In a cross-sectional national sample of individuals seeking MaPGAS, decisional uncertainty was the highest for those considering both MaPGAS options compared with metoidioplasty or phalloplasty alone. This suggests this cohort would benefit from focused decision support.

A person-centred consultation intervention to improve shared decision-making about, and uptake of, osteoporosis medicines (iFraP): a pragmatic, parallel-group, individual randomised controlled trial protocol.

Good quality shared decision-making (SDM) conversations involve people with, or at risk of osteoporosis and clinicians collaborating to decide, where appropriate, which evidence-based medicines best fit the person's life, beliefs, and values. We developed the improving uptake of Fracture Prevention drug treatments (iFraP) intervention comprising a computerised Decision Support Tool (DST), clinician training package and information resources, for use in UK Fracture Liaison Service consultations.Two primary objectives to determine (1) the effect of the iFraP intervention on patient-reported ease in decision-making about osteoporosis medicines, and (2) cost-effectiveness of iFraP intervention compared to usual NHS care. Secondary objectives are to determine the iFraP intervention effect on patient reported outcome and experience measures, clinical effectiveness (osteoporosis medicine adherence), and to explore intervention acceptability, mechanisms, and processes underlying observed effects, and intervention implementation. The iFraP trial is a pragmatic, parallel-group, individual randomised controlled trial in patients referred to a Fracture Liaison Service, with nested mixed methods process evaluation and health economic analysis. Participants aged ≥50 years (n=380) are randomised (1:1 ratio) to one of two arms: (1) iFraP intervention (iFraP-i) or (2) comparator usual NHS care (iFraP-u) and are followed up at 2-weeks and 3-months. The primary outcome is ease of decision-making assessed 2 weeks after the consultation using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). The primary objectives will be addressed by comparing the mean DCS score in each trial arm (using analysis of covariance) for patients given an osteoporosis medicine recommendation, alongside a within-trial cost-effectiveness and value of information (VoI) analysis. Process evaluation data collection includes consultation recordings, semi-structured interviews, and DST analytics. The iFraP trial will answer important questions about the effectiveness of the new 'iFraP' osteoporosis DST, coupled with clinician training, on SDM and informed initiation of osteoporosis medicines. ISRCTN 10606407, 21/11/2022 https://doi.org/10.1186/ISRCTN10606407.

Shared Decision-Making in Cardiovascular Risk Factor Management

The effect of shared decision-making (SDM) and the extent of its use in interventions to improve cardiovascular risk remain unclear. To assess the extent to which SDM is used in interventions aimed to enhance the management of cardiovascular risk factors and to explore the association of SDM with decisional outcomes, cardiovascular risk factors, and health behaviors. For this systematic review and meta-analysis, a literature search was conducted in the Medline, CINAHL, Embase, Cochrane, Web of Science, Scopus, and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for articles published from inception to June 24, 2022, without language restrictions. Randomized clinical trials (RCTs) comparing SDM-based interventions with standard of care for cardiovascular risk factor management were included. The systematic search resulted in 9365 references. Duplicates were removed, and 2 independent reviewers screened the trials (title, abstract, and full text) and extracted data. Data were pooled using a random-effects model. The review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline. Decisional outcomes, cardiovascular risk factor outcomes, and health behavioral outcomes. This review included 57 RCTs with 88 578 patients and 1341 clinicians. A total of 59 articles were included, as 2 RCTs were reported twice. Nearly half of the studies (29 [49.2%]) tested interventions that targeted both patients and clinicians, and an equal number (29 [49.2%]) exclusively focused on patients. More than half (32 [54.2%]) focused on diabetes management, and one-quarter focused on multiple cardiovascular risk factors (14 [23.7%]). Most studies (35 [59.3%]) assessed cardiovascular risk factors and health behaviors as well as decisional outcomes. The quality of studies reviewed was low to fair. The SDM intervention was associated with a decrease of 4.21 points (95% CI, -8.21 to -0.21) in Decisional Conflict Scale scores (9 trials; I2 = 85.6%) and a decrease of 0.20% (95% CI, -0.39% to -0.01%) in hemoglobin A1c (HbA1c) levels (18 trials; I2 = 84.2%). In this systematic review and meta-analysis of the current state of research on SDM interventions for cardiovascular risk management, there was a slight reduction in decisional conflict and an improvement in HbA1c levels with substantial heterogeneity. High-quality studies are needed to inform the use of SDM to improve cardiovascular risk management.

Validating care and treatment scenarios for measuring decisional conflict regarding future care preferences among older adults.

Decisional conflict is used increasingly as an outcome measure in advance care planning (ACP) studies. When the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) is used in anticipatory decision-making contexts, the scale is typically tethered to hypothetical scenarios. This study reports preliminary validation data for hypothetical scenarios relating to life-sustaining treatments and care utilisation to inform their broader use in ACP studies. Three hypothetical scenarios were developed by a panel of multidisciplinary researchers, clinicians and community representatives. A convenience sample of 262 older adults were surveyed. Analyses investigated comprehensibility, missing data properties, sample norms, structural, convergent and discriminant validity. Response characteristics suggested that two of the scenarios had adequate comprehensibility and response spread. Missing response rates were unrelated to demographic characteristics. Predicted associations between DCS scores and anxiety (r's = .31-.37, p < .001), and ACP engagement (r's = -.41 to -.37, p < .001) indicated convergent validity. A substantial proportion of older adults reported clinically significant levels of decisional conflict when responding to a range of hypothetical scenarios about care or treatment. Two scenarios showed acceptable comprehensibility and response characteristics. A third scenario may be suitable following further refinement. The scenarios tested here were designed in collaboration with a community representative and were further piloted with two groups of community members with relevant lived experiences; four people with life-limiting conditions and five current or former care partners.

Age and race/ethnicity differences in decisional conflict in women diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ

PurposeWomen diagnosed with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) face confusion and uncertainty about treatment options. The objective of this study was to determine whether there are differences in decisional conflict about treatment by age and race/ethnicity.MethodsA cross-sectional survey was conducted of women (age ≥ 18) diagnosed with DCIS enrolled at Kaiser Permanente of Southern California. The Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) measured personal perceptions of decision uncertainty, values clarity, and effective decision-making. We used a multivariable regression to study whether age, race, and ethnicity were associated with patient-reported DCS.Results45% (N = 1395) of women who received the online survey, participated. The mean age was 56 (± 9.6) years, the majority were white. Compared to women younger than 50, women aged 60–69 reported lower overall DCS scores (-5.4; 95% CI -1.5 to -9.3). Women > 70 had lower values clarity scores (-9.0; 95% CI -2.8 to -15.2) about their treatment compared to women aged 50–59 and 60–69 (-7.1; 95% CI -2.9 to -11.3 and − 7.2; 95% CI -2.9 to -11.5) and likewise, lower effective decision-making scores (-5.4; 95% CI -1.7 to -9.2 and − 5.2; 95% CI -1.4 to -9.0) compared to women < 50. Compared to whites, blacks reported lower decision conflict (-4.4; 95% CI 0.04 to -8.8) and lower informed decision (-5.2; 95% CI -0.18 to -10.3) about DCIS treatment.ConclusionYounger women reported higher decisional conflict about DCIS treatment, compared to older women (> 70). Age based tailored discussions about treatment options, health education, and supportive decision-making interventions/tools may reduce decision conflict in future DCIS patients.Trade registrationThe IRB number is 10678.

A video-based decision aid improved knowledge and decreased decisional conflict for asymptomatic persistent endodontic lesions.

This prospective cohort study aimed to (i) evaluate patients' treatment decisions, decisional conflict and knowledge levels before and after use of a video-based decision aid (DA) on asymptomatic persistent endodontic lesions (APEL) and to (ii) elicit important decision factors for patients in the decision-making process. A video DA modelled after the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) was designed. The video was pilot-tested, revised and used on 50 patients referred to the graduate endodontic clinic and presenting with an incidental finding of APEL detected on radiographs, with informed consent (DSRB 2020/00133). Recruitment was conducted from June 2020 to November 2021. Patients' treatment decisions and decision-making process were studied. Patients also completed a questionnaire on knowledge gain, decisional conflict and confidence levels. Forty-three patients (48 teeth) out of 50 patients chose long-term monitoring of APEL while 7 patients (7 teeth) decided on endodontic intervention. Median knowledge scores increased from 58.3 (IQR: 41.7, 75.0) to 87.5 (IQR: 75.0, 100.0) (p < .001); median decisional conflict scale (DCS) scores decreased from 25.0 (IQR: 12.5, 34.4) to 3.1 (IQR: 0, 23.8) (p < .001), and 44 (88%) patients were confident or very confident with their treatment decisions. Statistical analyses showed that asymptomatic condition of tooth was the sole decision factor with statistical significance while socioeconomic factors (age, gender, race, education and income levels) showed no significant trend. The majority of patients presenting with APEL in this study chose long-term monitoring over immediate intervention. Using the video-based DA in the decision-making process significantly improved patients' knowledge and decreased their decisional conflict levels.

Abstract 13746: Mental Health and Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator Implantation in Black Patients at Risk for Sudden Cardiac Death

Introduction: Black patients with guideline indications for implantable cardioverter defibrillators (ICD) have lower rates of implantation compared to White patients. The Educational Videos to Address Racial Disparities in ICD Therapy Via Innovative Designs (VIVID) trial enrolled self-identified Black individuals with chronic systolic heart failure and studied the impact of a video-based decision-support tool on decisional quality and ICD implantation. Hypothesis: We hypothesized that depressive symptoms are associated with greater decisional conflict and lower rates of ICD implantation among study participants. Methods: Participants were administered the Patient Health Questionnaire-2 (PHQ-2) depression screen; and the 12-Item Short-Form Health Survey, from which we derived the Mental Component Summary-12 (MCS-12). A decisional conflict scale (DCS) adapted from the Ottawa framework for shared decision-making was used to assess decisional conflict associated with the decision for ICD implantation. An analysis of covariance was used to assess differences in DCS scores. Multivariable logistic regression was used to examine the association between mental health scores and ICD implantation at 90 days. Results: Among 306 included participants, 60 (19.6%) reported depressed mood and 142 (46.4%) reported anhedonia. Participants with the lowest MCS-12 scores (poorer mental health) had greater decisional conflict regarding ICD assent compared to those with the highest MCS-12 scores (adjusted mean difference in DCS score = 3.05 [95% CI: 0.32, 5.78]). By 90-day follow-up, 204 participants (66.6%) underwent ICD implantation. There was no significant association between either PHQ-2 score or MCS-12 score and ICD implantation. Conclusions: Depressed mood and anhedonia were prevalent among Black patients considering primary prevention ICD. Poorer mental health did not impact the likelihood of ICD implantation in this population.

Effectiveness of a Decision Aid Plus Standard Care in Surgical Management Among Patients With Early Breast Cancer

Patients with early breast cancer must choose between undergoing breast conservation surgery or mastectomy. This decision is often difficult as there are trade-offs between breast conservation and adverse effects, and women with higher decisional conflict have a harder time choosing the therapy that suits their preferences. To study the impact of a decision aid with a patient preference assessment tool for surgical decision-making on patients' decisional conflict scale (DCS) score. This 3-group randomized clinical trial was conducted between June 2017 and December 2019 at a single high-volume tertiary care cancer center in Mumbai, India. A research questionnaire comprising 16 questions answered on a Likert scale (from 1, strongly agree, to 5, strongly disagree) was used to measure DCS scores and other secondary psychological variables, with higher scores indicating more decisional conflict. The Navya Patient Preference Tool (Navya-PPT) was developed as a survey-based presentation of evidence in an adaptive, conjoint analysis-based module for and trade-offs between cosmesis, adverse effects of radiotherapy, and cost of mandatory radiation following breast-conserving surgery. Adult patients with histologically proven early breast cancer (cT1-2, N0-1) who were eligible for breast-conserving surgery as per clinicoradiological assessment were included. Those who were pregnant or unable to read the research questionnaire or who had bilateral breast cancer were excluded. Data were analyzed from January to June 2020. Patients were randomized 1:1:1 to study groups: standard care including clinical explanation about surgery (control), standard care plus the Navya-PPT provided to the patient alone (solo group), and standard care plus the Navya-PPT provided to the patient and a caregiver (joint group). The primary end point of the study was DCS score. The study was 80% powered with 2-sided α = .01 to detect an effect size of 0.25 measured by Cohen d, F test analysis of variance, and fixed effects. A total of 245 female patients (median [range] age, 48 [23-76] years) were randomized (82 to control, 83 to the solo group, and 80 to the joint group). The median (range) pathological tumor size was 2.5 (0-6) cm. A total of 153 participants (62.4%) had pN0 disease, 185 (75.5%) were hormone receptor positive, 197 (80.4%) were human epidermal growth factor receptor 2 negative, 144 (58.6%) were of middle or lower socioeconomic status, and 114 (46.5%) had an education level lower than a college degree. DCS score was significantly reduced in the solo group compared with control (1.34 vs 1.66, respectively; Cohen d, 0.50; SD, 0.31; P < .001) and the joint group compared with control (1.31 vs 1.66, respectively; Cohen d, 0.54; SD, 0.31; P < .001). The results of this study demonstrated lower decisional conflict as measured by DCS score following use of the online, self-administered Navya-PPT among patients with early breast cancer choosing between breast-conserving surgery vs mastectomy. Clinical Trials Registry of India Identifier: CTRI/2017/11/010480.