Determinants of practice for providing decision coaching to facilitate informed values-based decision-making: protocol for a mixed-methods systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Decision coaching is a non-directive approach to support patients to prepare for making health decisions. It is used to facilitate patients' involvement in informed values-based decision-making and use of evidence-based health information. A recent systematic review revealed low certainty evidence for its effectiveness with and without evidence-based information. However, there may be opportunities to improve the study and use of decision coaching in clinical practice by systematically investigating its determinants of practice. We aim to conduct a systematic review to identify and synthesise the determinants of practice for providing decision coaching to facilitate patient involvement in decision-making from multiple perspectives that influence its use. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a mixed-methods systematic review guided by the Cochrane' Handbook of Systematic Reviews. We will include studies reporting determinants of practice influencing decision coaching with or without evidence-based patient information with adults making a health decision for themselves or a family member. Systematic literature searches will be conducted in Medline, EMBASE, Cochrane CENTRAL and PsycINFO via Ovid and CINAHL via EBSCO including quantitative, qualitative and mixed-methods study designs. Additionally, experts in the field will be contacted.Two reviewers will independently screen and extract data. We will synthesise determinants using deductive and inductive qualitative content analysis and a coding frame developed specifically for this review based on a taxonomy of barriers and enablers of shared decision-making mapped onto the major domains of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. We will assess the quality of included studies using the Mixed Methods Appraisal Tool. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval is not required as this systematic review involves only previously published literature. The results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at scientific conferences and disseminated to relevant consumer groups. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42022338299.

Immunotherapy for people with clinically isolated syndrome or relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis: treatment response by demographic, clinical, and biomarker subgroups (PROMISE)-a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Multiple sclerosis (MS) is an inflammatory and degenerative disease of the central nervous system with an increasing worldwide prevalence. Since 1993, more than 15 disease-modifying immunotherapies (DMTs) have been licenced and have shown moderate efficacy in clinical trials. Based on the heterogeneity of the disease and the partial effectiveness of therapies, a personalised medicine approach would be valuable taking individual prognosis and suitability of a chosen therapy into account to gain the best possible treatment effect. The primary objective of this review is to assess the differential treatment effects of all approved DMTs in subgroups of adults with clinically isolated syndrome or relapsing forms of MS. We will analyse possible treatment effect modifiers (TEM) defined by baseline demographic characteristics (gender, age), and diagnostic (i.e. MRI measures) and clinical (i.e. relapses, disability level) measures of MS disease activity. METHODS: We will include all published and accessible unpublished primary and secondary analyses of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) with a follow-up of at least 12 months investigating the efficacy of at least one approved DMT, with placebo or other approved DMTs as control intervention(s) in subgroups of trial participants. As the primary outcome, we will address disability as defined by the Expanded Disability Status Scale or multiple sclerosis functional composite scores followed by relapse frequency, quality of life measures, and side effects. MRI data will be analysed as secondary outcomes. MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, LILACS, CENTRAL and major trial registers will be searched for suitable studies. Titles and abstracts and full texts will be screened by two persons independently using Covidence. The risk of bias will be analysed based on the Cochrane "Risk of Bias 2" tool, and the certainty of evidence will be assessed using GRADE. Treatment effects will be reported as rate ratio or odds ratio. Primary analyses will follow the intention-to-treat principle. Meta-analyses will be carried out using random-effects models. DISCUSSION: Given that individual patient data from clinical studies are often not available, the review will allow to analyse the evidence on TEM in MS immunotherapy and thus support clinical decision making in individual cases. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021279665 .

Decision coaching for people making healthcare decisions.

BACKGROUND: Decision coaching is non-directive support delivered by a healthcare provider to help patients prepare to actively participate in making a health decision. 'Healthcare providers' are considered to be all people who are engaged in actions whose primary intent is to protect and improve health (e.g. nurses, doctors, pharmacists, social workers, health support workers such as peer health workers). Little is known about the effectiveness of decision coaching. OBJECTIVES: To determine the effects of decision coaching (I) for people facing healthcare decisions for themselves or a family member (P) compared to (C) usual care or evidence-based intervention only, on outcomes (O) related to preparation for decision making, decisional needs and potential adverse effects. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Library (Wiley), Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE (Ovid), Embase (Ovid), PsycINFO (Ovid), CINAHL (Ebsco), Nursing and Allied Health Source (ProQuest), and Web of Science from database inception to June 2021. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) where the intervention was provided to adults or children preparing to make a treatment or screening healthcare decision for themselves or a family member. Decision coaching was defined as: a) delivered individually by a healthcare provider who is trained or using a protocol; and b) providing non-directive support and preparing an adult or child to participate in a healthcare decision. Comparisons included usual care or an alternate intervention. There were no language restrictions. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened citations, assessed risk of bias, and extracted data on characteristics of the intervention(s) and outcomes. Any disagreements were resolved by discussion to reach consensus. We used the standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) as the measures of treatment effect and, where possible, synthesised results using a random-effects model. If more than one study measured the same outcome using different tools, we used a random-effects model to calculate the standardised mean difference (SMD) and 95% CI. We presented outcomes in summary of findings tables and applied GRADE methods to rate the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: Out of 12,984 citations screened, we included 28 studies of decision coaching interventions alone or in combination with evidence-based information, involving 5509 adult participants (aged 18 to 85 years; 64% female, 52% white, 33% African-American/Black; 68% post-secondary education). The studies evaluated decision coaching used for a range of healthcare decisions (e.g. treatment decisions for cancer, menopause, mental illness, advancing kidney disease; screening decisions for cancer, genetic testing). Four of the 28 studies included three comparator arms.  For decision coaching compared with usual care (n = 4 studies), we are uncertain if decision coaching compared with usual care improves any outcomes (i.e. preparation for decision making, decision self-confidence, knowledge, decision regret, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low.  For decision coaching compared with evidence-based information only (n = 4 studies), there is low certainty-evidence that participants exposed to decision coaching may have little or no change in knowledge (SMD -0.23, 95% CI: -0.50 to 0.04; 3 studies, 406 participants). There is low certainty-evidence that participants exposed to decision coaching may have little or no change in anxiety, compared with evidence-based information. We are uncertain if decision coaching compared with evidence-based information improves other outcomes (i.e. decision self-confidence, feeling uninformed) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. For decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with usual care (n = 17 studies), there is low certainty-evidence that participants may have improved knowledge (SMD 9.3, 95% CI: 6.6 to 12.1; 5 studies, 1073 participants). We are uncertain if decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with usual care improves other outcomes (i.e. preparation for decision making, decision self-confidence, feeling uninformed, unclear values, feeling unsupported, decision regret, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. For decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with evidence-based information only (n = 7 studies), we are uncertain if decision coaching plus evidence-based information compared with evidence-based information only improves any outcomes (i.e. feeling uninformed, unclear values, feeling unsupported, knowledge, anxiety) as the certainty of the evidence was very low. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Decision coaching may improve participants' knowledge when used with evidence-based information. Our findings do not indicate any significant adverse effects (e.g. decision regret, anxiety) with the use of decision coaching. It is not possible to establish strong conclusions for other outcomes. It is unclear if decision coaching always needs to be paired with evidence-informed information. Further research is needed to establish the effectiveness of decision coaching for a broader range of outcomes.

Comprehension of confidence intervals in audio-visual patient information materials for people with multiple sclerosis (COCO-MS): A web-based randomised controlled, parallel group trial.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate patient information materials on confidence intervals (CIs) in multiple sclerosis to be used with patient decision aids. METHODS: Web-based randomised controlled parallel group trial with four study arms. Participants were equally allocated to one of three versions of audio-visual patient information or to a standard written information (arm IV). In the short version (arm III), CIs were explained without using an example, in the other two versions examples were used (arm I and arm II). The examples are based on an apple farmer who wants to estimate the average weight of his apples (arm I) and to test a treatment against worms (arm II). Primary endpoint was comprehension of CIs, assessed with a six-item multiple-choice questionnaire. RESULTS: 855 of 1068 (80 %) randomised participants completed the survey (71 % arm I, 73 % arm II, 87 % arm III, 90 % arm IV). The median of correctly answered questions on CIs was 4 out of 6 questions in arms I and II and 5 out of 6 questions in arm III. Compared to the standard information (arm IV), all the other arms scored better on the comprehension questionnaire (ANOVA, p ≤ 0.003). CONCLUSIONS: Information about CIs can be presented comprehensibly. High scores and a high rate of completers indicate that the short version is the favourable one. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Information materials on CIs should be used alongside absolute risk reductions in patient decision aids to enhance the interpretation of study results.

Quality of Stroke Patient Information Applied in Randomized Controlled Trials-Literature Review.

Background: Strokes have a huge impact on patients' quality of life. Although there are potentially effective secondary preventions and treatment options for stroke patients, adherence is mostly low. Low disease and treatment-related knowledge and, consequently, a lack of informed decision-making in stroke patients may contribute to this problem. However, stroke patient information did not seem to have relevant effects on patients' knowledge in randomized controlled trials. One contributing factor may be the lack of thoroughly developed patient information materials. Methods: We aimed to evaluate the quality of patient information materials for stroke patients by using randomized controlled trials, applying quality criteria for evidence-based patient information (EBPI). We conducted a literature search (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and CENTRAL). To be included in the review, research had to be randomized controlled trials that provided stroke patient information, were published in English, and had knowledge assessed as the primary endpoint. Authors of primary studies were contacted and asked for information materials applied. Results: We screened 15,507 hits and identified 30 eligible studies. Information materials were available for only eight studies. Analyses revealed that all available materials had important shortcomings concerning EBPI quality criteria [concerning, for example, structural information (e.g., reporting conflicts of interest), content information (e.g., reporting sources of information), or comprehensive descriptions of treatment effects and side effects]. Frequently, treatment effects were reported only narratively without providing absolute numbers, values, or frequencies. Conclusion: Quality of materials differed, but none sufficiently fulfilled EBPI quality criteria. Unsatisfactory trial results concerning patient knowledge and patient involvement in decision-making may at least partially be explained by limitations of the provided materials. Future patient information should consider EBPI quality criteria.

Exploring Adherence to First-Line and Second-Line Immunotherapies in Multiple Sclerosis: An Interview Study.

BACKGROUND: Treatment adherence is fundamental in multiple sclerosis (MS) management. Adherence rates vary significantly between studies, ranging from 30% to almost 90%, depending on assessment method and medication type. This study aimed to identify patient-related categories associated with treatment modification or discontinuation in people with MS receiving either first- or second-line treatment. METHODS: Semistructured interviews were performed with 23 people with MS: 11 receiving first-line treatment and 12 receiving second-line treatment. Medication history, experiences with previous medications, decision-making processes regarding immunotherapy, adherence behavior, and reasons for adherence/nonadherence were explored using open-ended questions. Qualitative content analysis was performed using a combined deductive-inductive approach in building a coding frame. Differences in coding frequencies were compared between the two groups and analyzed quantitatively. Cohen's kappas of 0.76 for people with MS receiving first-line treatment and 0.64 for the second-line sample were achieved between the two coders. RESULTS: One key reason for nonadherence reported by first-line-treated people with MS was burdensome side effects, and for adherence was belief in medication effectiveness. In people with MS receiving second-line treatment, lack of perceived medication effectiveness was a key category related to changes in or discontinuation of immunotherapy. Reasons for adherence were positive illness beliefs/perceptions and belief in highly active disease. Intentional nonadherence was a major issue for first-line treatment and less relevant for second-line treatment. CONCLUSIONS: These results indicate specific differences in factors mitigating adherence in people with MS receiving first- and second-line treatment.

Fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis Is Associated With Childhood Adversities.

Fatigue is a common and disabling symptom in patients with Multiple Sclerosis (PwMS). Its pathogenesis, however, is still not fully understood. Potential psychological roots, in particular, have received little attention to date. The present study examined the association of childhood adversities, specific trait characteristics, and MS disease characteristics with fatigue symptoms utilizing path analysis. Five hundred and seventy-one PwMS participated in an online survey. Standardized psychometric tools were applied. The Childhood Trauma Questionnaire (CTQ) served to assess childhood adversities. Trait variables were alexithymia (Toronto Alexithymia Scale; TAS-26) and early maladaptive schemas (Young Schema Questionnaire; YSQ). Current pathology comprised depression (Beck's Depression Inventory FastScreen; BDI-FS) and anxiety symptoms (State-Trait Anxiety Inventory; STAI-state), as well as physical disability (Patient determined Disease Steps; PDDS). The Fatigue Scale for Motor and Cognitive Functions (FSMC) was the primary outcome variable measuring fatigue. PwMS displayed high levels of fatigue and depression (mean FSMC score: 72; mean BDI-II score: 18). The final path model revealed that CTQ emotional neglect and emotional abuse remained as the only significant childhood adversity variables associated with fatigue. There were differential associations for the trait variables and current pathology: TAS-26, the YSQ domain impaired autonomy and performance, as well as all current pathology measures had direct effects on fatigue symptoms, accounting for 28.2% of the FSMC variance. Bayesian estimation also revealed indirect effects from the two CTQ subscales on FSMC. The final model fitted the data well, also after a cross-validation check and after replacing the FSMC with the Chalder Fatigue Questionnaire (CFQ). This study suggests an association psychological factors on fatigue in Multiple Sclerosis. Childhood adversities, as well as specific trait characteristics, seem to be associated with current pathology and fatigue symptoms. The article discusses potential implications and limitations.

Feasibility of a smartphone app to enhance physical activity in progressive MS: a pilot randomized controlled pilot trial over three months.

BACKGROUND: People with chronic progressive multiple sclerosis (CPMS) have limited options in medical treatment. Enhancing physical activity (PA) might promote neuroregeneration in multiple sclerosis (MS) and positively influence disability, thus providing an alternative to medical treatment. Previous studies indicate that evidence-based patient information (EBPI) is essential for inducing behavioral change, e.g. enhancing PA. OBJECTIVE: To investigate feasibility of a smartphone app providing EBPI about the benefit of PA and a simple activity feedback to enhance PA in people with CPMS in a pilot randomized controlled trial over 3 months. METHODS: Thirty-eight people with CPMS (mean age 51 years, median Expanded Disability Status Scale 4.0) were 1:1 randomized into either a control group (n = 20) or an intervention group (n = 18). The intervention group received access to a multimedia EBPI app including activity feedback, texts, figures and videos. In the control group, participants received a leaflet with unspecific information about exercising in general. The EPBI itself was designed based on a systematic review. At baseline and after 3 months, all participants underwent clinical performance tests, filled in questionnaires and received an activity monitor (Actigraph®) for 7 days. The primary endpoint was the rate of responders defined as participants with a 20% increase of physical acitivity (time of moderate or vigiorous PA-MVPA) or 20% increase of the number of steps, both assessed with the activity monitor. As secondary endpoints, we compared accelerometry, performance and questionnaires adjusted for baseline measurments between the groups (ANCOVA). Moreover, we used questionnaires to compare knowledge about exercise (activity requiring physical effort, carried out to improve or improve health and fitness) in MS, usability of the app in general and motivation towards a more active lifestyle after 3 months in both groups. RESULTS: The groups showed significant differences in disease duration and PA according to the Godin-Leisure Time Exercise Questionnaire at baseline. After 3 months, we detected no difference in the rate of responders, which was an overall 22%. However, MVPA significantly increased in both groups (p < 0.001) and the intervention group tended to have a higher motivation towards a more active lifestyle (Cohens D = 0.7, p = 0.09) as measured by the questionnaire. Reponses also showed, that participants appreciated the app but claimed a lack of interactivity as a short-coming. CONCLUSION: Just providing information in a multimedia smartphone app did not enhance physical activitiy more than a simple leaflet in this small pilot trial in CPMS. However, the group of app users tended to have a higher motivation towards a more active lifestyle. Overall, the concept of a smartphone app to support an active lifestyle in MS is highly appreciated by participants.

EAN Guideline on Palliative Care of People with Severe, Progressive Multiple Sclerosis.

Background and Purpose: Patients with severe, progressive multiple sclerosis (MS) have complex physical and psychosocial needs, typically over several years. Few treatment options are available to prevent or delay further clinical worsening in this population. The objective was to develop an evidence-based clinical practice guideline for the palliative care of patients with severe, progressive MS. Methods: This guideline was developed using the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation methodology. Formulation of the clinical questions was performed in the Patients-Intervention-Comparator-Outcome format, involving patients, carers and healthcare professionals (HPs). No uniform definition of severe MS exists: in this guideline, constant bilateral support required to walk 20 m without resting (Expanded Disability Status Scale score >6.0) or higher disability is referred to. When evidence was lacking for this population, recommendations were formulated using indirect evidence or good practice statements were devised. Results: Ten clinical questions were formulated. They encompassed general and specialist palliative care, advance care planning, discussing with HPs the patient's wish to hasten death, symptom management, multidisciplinary rehabilitation, interventions for caregivers and interventions for HPs. A total of 34 recommendations (33 weak, 1 strong) and seven good practice statements were devised. Conclusions: The provision of home-based palliative care (either general or specialist) is recommended with weak strength for patients with severe, progressive MS. Further research on the integration of palliative care and MS care is needed. Areas that currently lack evidence of efficacy in this population include advance care planning, the management of symptoms such as fatigue and mood problems, and interventions for caregivers and HPs.

Magnetic resonance imaging as a prognostic disability marker in clinically isolated syndrome: A systematic review.

Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is the key prognostic tool in people with a clinically isolated syndrome (CIS). There is increasing interest in treating people following a CIS in the hope that conversion to multiple sclerosis (MS) will be prevented and future disability reduced. So far, the prognostic value of MRI for disability following a CIS has not been evaluated systematically. We systematically searched MEDLINE and EMBASE. Cohort studies were selected if they reported associations of MRI and disability following a CIS, included at least 50 people with a CIS at baseline, had at least 5 years of follow-up and obtained at least one structural MRI measurement (T1 lesions, T2 lesions, T1 contrast-enhancing lesions or brain atrophy). We assessed the studies for quality and rated the completeness of MRI reporting. In total, 13 studies were identified reporting on the following: T2 lesion number and volume, T2 infratentorial lesion number and volume, T1 contrast-enhancing lesions and grey matter fraction. T2 brain lesion number determined soon after the occurrence of a CIS was associated with disability progression after 5-7 years, with an increased risk when 10 or more lesions were present. Infratentorial lesions were also associated with a higher risk of subsequent disability. The number and distribution of MRI-visible lesions soon after a CIS are associated with disability later on, and may offer additional useful information when making treatment decisions in people with early MS. Further work is required to determine whether other measures have a higher predictive potential.

Comprehension of confidence intervals - development and piloting of patient information materials for people with multiple sclerosis: qualitative study and pilot randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Presentation of confidence intervals alongside information about treatment effects can support informed treatment choices in people with multiple sclerosis. We aimed to develop and pilot-test different written patient information materials explaining confidence intervals in people with relapsing-remitting multiple sclerosis. Further, a questionnaire on comprehension of confidence intervals was developed and piloted. METHODS: We developed different patient information versions aiming to explain confidence intervals. We used an illustrative example to test three different approaches: (1) short version, (2) "average weight" version and (3) "worm prophylaxis" version. Interviews were conducted using think-aloud and teach-back approaches to test feasibility and analysed using qualitative content analysis. To assess comprehension of confidence intervals, a six-item multiple choice questionnaire was developed and tested in a pilot randomised controlled trial using the online survey software UNIPARK. Here, the average weight version (intervention group) was tested against a standard patient information version on confidence intervals (control group). People with multiple sclerosis were invited to take part using existing mailing-lists of people with multiple sclerosis in Germany and were randomised using the UNIPARK algorithm. Participants were blinded towards group allocation. Primary endpoint was comprehension of confidence intervals, assessed with the six-item multiple choice questionnaire with six points representing perfect knowledge. RESULTS: Feasibility of the patient information versions was tested with 16 people with multiple sclerosis. For the pilot randomised controlled trial, 64 people with multiple sclerosis were randomised (intervention group: n = 36; control group: n = 28). More questions were answered correctly in the intervention group compared to the control group (mean 4.8 vs 3.8, mean difference 1.1 (95 % CI 0.42-1.69), p = 0.002). The questionnaire's internal consistency was moderate (Cronbach's alpha = 0.56). CONCLUSIONS: The pilot-phase shows promising results concerning acceptability and feasibility. Pilot randomised controlled trial results indicate that the patient information is well understood and that knowledge gain on confidence intervals can be assessed with a set of six questions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00008561 . Registered 8th of June 2015.