Enhancing Patient Understanding of Medication Risks and Benefits.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effectiveness of 2 interventions, including the DrugFactsBox format for presenting written medication information and the SMART (Strategic Memory Advanced Reasoning Training) program designed to enhance gist (i.e., "bottom-line" meaning) reasoning ability. METHODS: We used a 2 × 2 factorial research design. A total of 286 patients with rheumatoid arthritis were randomly assigned to 1 of 4 groups, including DrugFactsBox with the SMART program, DrugFactsBox without the SMART program, other consumer medication information (CMI) with the SMART program, and other CMI without the SMART program. Data were collected via telephone interviews and online questionnaires at 4 time points, including baseline and 6-week, 3-month, and 6-month time points following baseline. The primary outcome variable was informed decision-making, which was defined as making a value-consistent decision concerning use of disease-modifying antirheumatic drugs based on adequate knowledge. RESULTS: We found no main effects for the 2 interventions, either alone or in combination. However, there was a significant interaction between assignment to the SMART/no SMART groups and informed decision-making at baseline. Among participants in the SMART groups who did not meet the criteria for informed decision-making at baseline, 42.5% met the criteria at the 6-month follow-up, compared to 23.6% of participants in the no SMART groups (mean difference 18.9 [95% confidence interval 5.6, 32.2]; P = 0.007). This difference was driven by increased knowledge in the SMART groups. Among participants who met the criteria for informed decision-making at baseline, the difference between the SMART and no SMART groups was not statistically significant. CONCLUSION: Participation in a theory-driven program to enhance gist reasoning may have a beneficial effect on informed decision-making among patients with inadequate knowledge concerning therapeutic options.

Accuracy of Predictions of Patients With Breast Cancer of Future Well-being After Immediate Breast Reconstruction.

Importance: Making a good decision about breast reconstruction requires predicting how one would feel after the procedure, but people tend to overestimate the impact of events on future well-being. Objective: To assess how well patients predict future well-being after mastectomy, with or without immediate reconstruction, with the following a priori hypotheses: Patients will overestimate the negative impact of mastectomy and positive impact of reconstruction, and prediction accuracy will be associated with decision satisfaction and decision regret. Design, Setting, and Participants: This prospective cohort survey study was conducted at a single, multidisciplinary academic oncology clinic from July 2012 to February 2014. Adult women undergoing mastectomy for stage 1, 2, or 3 invasive ductal or lobular breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ, or prophylaxis were invited to participate. Data analysis was conducted from September 2015 to October 2017. Exposures: Mastectomy only or mastectomy with immediate reconstruction. Main Outcomes and Measures: Preoperative measures predicted were 12-month happiness (Cantril Ladder) and quality of life, predicted satisfaction with breasts, sexual attractiveness, breast numbness, and pain (measured with BreastQ single items). Measures at 12 months postoperative added the Decision Regret Scale and Satisfaction With Decisions Scale. Results: Of 214 eligible patients, 182 consecutive patients were approached, and 145 enrolled (80%). Of these 145 patients, 131 returned surveys (72%) and 111 of these remained at 12 months (88%). Fifteen who had delayed reconstruction were excluded from analysis, leaving a final cohort of 96 women; 54 had not had reconstruction and 42 had had reconstruction. The mean (SD) age of the cohort was 53.9 (12.1) years; 73 (76%) were white; 50 (52%) were college graduates; 54 (56%) were privately insured; 69 (72%) had disease at stages 0, 1, or 2; and 31 (32%) received adjuvant radiation. Patients having mastectomy without reconstruction underestimated future well-being in all domains. Differences were significant for quality of life scores (mean predicted, 68 vs mean actual, 74; t50, -2.47; P = .02) and satisfaction with breasts-clothed (mean predicted, 2.4 vs mean actual, 2.8; t49, -2.11; P = .04). Patients undergoing mastectomy with reconstruction overestimated future well-being in all but 1 domain. Differences were significant for satisfaction with breasts-unclothed (mean predicted, 3.1 vs mean actual, 2.6; t41, 2.70; P = .01); sexual attractiveness-clothed (mean predicted, 3.7 vs mean actual, 3.3; t39, 2.29; P = .03); sexual attractiveness-unclothed (mean predicted, 3.3 vs mean actual, 2.3; t40, 5.57; P < .001). Both groups experienced more numbness than predicted (mean predicted, 2.79 and 2.72 for mastectomy only and mastectomy with reconstruction groups, respectively; mean actual, 3.52 and 3.56, respectively; t47, -3.4 and t38, -2.9, respectively; P < .01). Patients who were less happy (ß = 6.3; P = .02) or had greater pain (ß = 8.7; P < .001) than predicted had greater regret. Conclusions and Relevance: Patients underestimated future well-being after mastectomy and overestimated well-being after reconstruction. Misprediction was associated with regret. Decision support for breast reconstruction should address expectations about well-being.

Quality of Patient Decisions About Breast Reconstruction After Mastectomy.

IMPORTANCE: Breast reconstruction has the potential to improve a person's body image and quality of life but has important risks. Variations in who undergoes breast reconstruction have led to questions about the quality of patient decisions. OBJECTIVE: To assess the quality of patient decisions about breast reconstruction. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: A prospective, cross-sectional survey study was conducted from June 27, 2012, to February 28, 2014, at a single, academic, multidisciplinary oncology clinic among women planning to undergo mastectomy for stage I to III invasive ductal or lobular breast cancer, ductal carcinoma in situ, or prophylaxis. EXPOSURES: Mastectomy only and mastectomy with reconstruction. MAIN OUTCOME AND MEASURES: Knowledge, as ascertained using the Decision Quality Instrument; preference concordance, based on rating and ranking of key attributes; and decision quality, defined as having knowledge of 50% or more and preference concordance. RESULTS: During the 20-month period, 214 patients were eligible, 182 were approached, and 32 missed. We enrolled 145 patients (79.7% enrollment rate), and received surveys from 131 patients (72.0% participation rate). Five participants became ineligible. The final study population was 126 patients. Among the 126 women in the study (mean [SD] age, 53.2 [12.1] years), the mean (SD) knowledge score was 58.5% (16.2%) and did not differ by treatment group (mastectomy only, 55.2% [15.0%]; mastectomy with reconstruction, 60.5% [16.5%]). A total of 82 of 123 participants (66.7%) had a calculated treatment preference of mastectomy only; 39 of these women (47.6%) underwent mastectomy only. A total of 41 participants (32.5%) had a calculated treatment preference of mastectomy with reconstruction; 36 of these women (87.8%) underwent mastectomy with reconstruction. Overall, 52 of 120 participants (43.3%) made a high-quality decision. In multivariable analysis, white race/ethnicity (odds ratio [OR], 2.72; 95% CI, 1.00-7.38; P = .05), having private insurance (OR, 1.61; 95% CI, 1.35-1.93; P < .001), having a high school education or less (vs some college) (OR, 4.84; 95% CI, 1.22-19.21; P = .02), having a college degree (vs some college) (OR, 1.95; 95% CI, 1.53-2.49; P < .001), and not having a malignant neoplasm (eg, BRCA carriers) (OR, 3.13; 95% CI, 1.25-7.85; P = .01) were independently associated with making a high-quality decision. CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: A minority of patients undergoing mastectomy in a single academic center made a high-quality decision about reconstruction. Shared decision making is needed to support decisions about breast reconstruction.