Decision-making experiences of patients and partners opting for active surveillance in esophageal cancer treatment.

OBJECTIVES: This study explored the decision-making experiences of patients and their partners or primary caregiver who opted for experimental active surveillance (instead of standard surgery) for the treatment of esophageal cancer. METHODS: Seventeen couples participated. Semi-structured interviews were conducted on couples' joint experiences as well as their individual experiences. Preferred and perceived role in the treatment decision-making process was assessed using the adjusted version of the Control Preferences Scale, and perceived influence on the treatment decision was measured using a visual analog scale. RESULTS: Couples reflected on the decision-making process as a positive collaboration, where patients retain their autonomy by making the final decision, and partners offer emotional support. Couples reported about an overwhelming amount and sometimes conflicting information about treatments among different hospitals and healthcare providers. CONCLUSIONS: Patients often involve their partner in decision-making, which they report to have enhanced their ability to cope with the disease. The amount and sometimes conflicting information during the decision-making process provide opportunities for improvement. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Couples can benefit from an overview of what they can expect during treatment course. If active surveillance becomes an established treatment option in the future, provision of such overviews and consistent information should become more streamlined.

Patient knowledge in anaesthesia: Psychometric development of the RAKQ-The Rotterdam anaesthesia Knowledge questionnaire.

The transition from in-person to digital preoperative patient education requires effective methods for evaluating patients' understanding of the perioperative process, risks, and instructions to ensure informed consent. A knowledge questionnaire covering different anaesthesia techniques and instructions could fulfil this need. We constructed a set of items covering common anaesthesia techniques requiring informed consent and developed the Rotterdam Anaesthesia Knowledge Questionnaire (RAKQ) using a structured approach and Item Response Theory. A team of anaesthetists and educational experts developed the initial set of 60 multiple-choice items, ensuring content and face validity. Next, based on exploratory factor analysis, we identified seven domains: General Anaesthesia-I (regarding what to expect), General Anaesthesia-II (regarding the risks), Spinal Anaesthesia, Epidural Anaesthesia, Regional Anaesthesia, Procedural sedation and analgesia, and Generic Items. This itemset was filled out by 577 patients in the Erasmus MC, Rotterdam, and Albert Schweitzer Hospital, Dordrecht, the Netherlands. Based on factor loadings (≥0.25) and considering clinical relevance this initial item set was reduced to 50 items, distributed over the seven domains. Each domain was processed to produce a separate questionnaire. Through an iterative process of item selection to ensure that the questionnaires met the criteria for Item Response Theory modelling, 40 items remained in the definitive set of seven questionnaires. Finally, we developed an Item Response Theory model for each questionnaire and evaluated its reliability. 1-PL and 2-PL models were chosen based on best model fit. No item misfit (S-χ2, p<0.001 = misfit) was detected in the final models. The newly developed RAKQ allows practitioners to assess their patients' knowledge before consultation to better address knowledge gaps during consultation. Moreover, they can decide whether the level of knowledge is sufficient to obtain digital informed consent without face-to-face education. Researchers can use the RAKQ to compare new methods of patient education with traditional methods.