Psycho-oncologists' experiences with video consultations during the Covid-19 pandemic and implications for the future-a multi-methods study.

OBJECTIVE: During the Covid-19 pandemic, there has been a substantial uptake of telemental health interventions. Consequently, the objective of this study was to assess psycho-oncologists' attitudes toward and experiences with video consultations (VC) since the beginning of the Covid-19 pandemic. Additionally, we sought to investigate psycho-oncologists' perspectives on the benefits and drawbacks of VC and its' potential implementation beyond the pandemic. METHODS: We used a multi-methods study design. First, semi-structured interviews with psycho-oncologists (N = 6) were conducted to inform the development of a cross-sectional online survey, which represented the quantitative part of our study. We invited psycho-oncologists, working in different settings, from all over Germany to participate. RESULTS: Data of N = 217 participants (88% female, 49% over 10 years work experience) of the online survey was analyzed. Psycho-oncologists' acceptance toward VC was average to high. In their daily practice, they preferred in-person consultations. Improved access to care and enhanced flexibility were seen as main advantages. The most significant disadvantages included technical issues, privacy concerns at home, loss of non-verbal cues and absence of physical presence for emotional support. Nevertheless, on average, psycho-oncologists wanted to continue seeing approximately 25% of their patients via VC in the future. CONCLUSIONS: Given the average to high acceptance of VC among psycho-oncologists and their desire to continue using VC flexibly even after the pandemic, it may be beneficial to implement VC into future psycho-oncology services. Still, future research should focus on the patients' perspective and the effectiveness of VC in psycho-oncology services.

Effects of a shared decision-making implementation programme on patient-centred communication in oncology-Secondary analysis of a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is a need for better implementation of patient-centred (PC) communication and shared decision-making (SDM) in routine cancer care. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to assess whether a programme to implement SDM in oncology had effects on PC communication in clinical encounters. DESIGN: This study constitutes a secondary analysis of data derived from an implementation trial applying a stepped wedge design that, among other strategies, incorporated training and coaching to enhance the PC communication skills of physicians. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: We analysed audio recordings of clinical encounters collected in three departments of a comprehensive cancer centre in Germany before and after rolling out the implementation programme. MAIN VARIABLES STUDIED: We assessed the PC communication skills of physicians. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Each recording was rated by two researchers using the German version of the Four Habits Coding Scheme (4HCS), an observer-based measure of PC communication. Interrater reliability of the outcome measure was acceptable but moderate. Demographic data of patients participating in audio recordings were analysed. METHODS: Data were analysed using descriptive statistics and linear mixed-effects models. RESULTS: In total, 146 encounters, 74 before and 72 after implementation, were evaluated. The mean age of patients was 57.1 years (SD = 13.8), 70.3% were female, the largest portion of patients had medium formal education (32.4%) and were (self-) employed (37.8%). No statistically significant effect of the implementation programme on the physicians' PC communication skills was found. DISCUSSION: The results indicate that the investigated programme to implement SDM in oncology, including training and coaching, had no effects on PC communication in clinical encounters. These results are in contrast to other studies that report the effects of specific training or coaching on PC communication. Reasons for the lack of effect include the short duration of our training compared to other studies, limited reliability and moderate interrater reliability of the 4HCS scale, limited reach of the intervention programme as well as the inclusion of physicians regardless of their exposure to the interventions. CONCLUSION: Further research is needed to develop implementation strategies that improve physicians' PC communication skills. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION: Data on patients and clinical encounters with patients and physicians were analysed. There was no other patient or public involvement.

Evaluation of a patient-centered communication skills training for nurses (KOMPAT): study protocol of a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To ensure high quality of nurses' communication as part of patient-centered care, training of communication skills is essential. Previous studies indicate that communication skills trainings can improve communication skills of nurses and have a positive effect on emotional and psychological burden. However, most show methodological limitations, are not specifically developed for nurses or were developed for oncological setting only. METHODS: This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of a needs-based communication skills training for nursing professionals and to derive indications for future implementation. A two-armed randomized controlled trial including components from both effectiveness and implementation research will be applied. Additionally, a comprehensive process evaluation will be carried out to derive indications for future implementation. Nurses (n=180) of a university medical center in Germany will be randomized to intervention or waitlist-control group. The intervention was developed based on the wishes and needs of nurses, previously assessed via interviews and focus groups. Outcomes to measure effectiveness were selected based on Kirkpatrick's four levels of training evaluation and will be assessed at baseline, post-training and at 4-weeks follow-up. Primary outcome will be nurses' self-reported self-efficacy regarding communication skills. Secondary outcomes include nurses' communication skills assessed via standardized patient assessment, knowledge about patient-centered communication, mental and work-related burden, and participants' satisfaction with training. DISCUSSION: To our knowledge, this is the first study systematically evaluating the effectiveness of a patient-centered communication skills training for nursing professionals in Germany. Results will yield insight whether a needs-based intervention can improve nurses' self-efficacy regarding communication skills and other secondary outcomes. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trial registration number: NCT05700929, trial register: ClinicalTrials.gov (date of registration: 16 November 2022).

Conceptualization of patient-centered care in Latin America: A scoping review.

INTRODUCTION: Patient-centered care (PCC) has been declared as a desirable goal for health care in Latin American countries, but a coherent definition of what exactly PCC entails for clinical practice is missing. This article's aim was to identify how PCC is conceptualized in Latin American countries. METHODS: Scientific databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, PsycINFO, CINAHL, Scielo, Scopus, Web of Science) and webpages of the ministries of health were searched, and experts were contacted for suggestions of literature. References were included if they contained one of a range of a priori defined keywords related to PCC in the title, were published between 2006 and 2021, and were carried out in or concerned Latin America. Definitions of PCC were extracted from the included articles and analyzed using deductive and inductive coding. Deductive coding was based on the integrative model of patient-centeredness, which unites the definitions of PCC in the international literature (mainly North America and Europe) and proposes 16 dimensions describing PCC. RESULTS: Thirty-two articles were included in the analysis and about half of them were from Brazil. Numerous similarities were found between the integrative model of patient-centeredness and the definitions of PCC given in the selected literature. The dimensions of the integrative model of patient-centeredness that were least and most prominent in the literature were physical support and patient information, respectively. A differentiation between PCC and family-centered care (FCC) was observed. Definitions of PCC and FCC as well as their cited references were diverse. CONCLUSION: A considerable overlap between the conceptualization of PCC in Latin America and the integrative model of patient-centeredness has been identified. However, there are substantial differences between countries in Latin America regarding the emphasis of research on PCC versus FCC and diverse conceptualizations of PCC and FCC exist. PATIENT CONTRIBUTION: This scoping review takes the patient's perspective based on the integrative model of patient-centeredness. Due to the study being a review, no patients, neither caregivers, nor members of the public, were involved.

Major influencing factors on routine implementation of shared decision-making in cancer care: qualitative process evaluation of a stepped-wedge cluster randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) is highly relevant in oncology but rarely implemented in routine care. In a stepped-wedge cluster randomized implementation trial, the outcome evaluation of a theoretically and empirically based multi-component SDM implementation program did not show a statistically significant effect on patient-reported SDM uptake. Within this SDM implementation trial, a thorough a priori planned process evaluation was conducted. Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate factors influencing SDM implementation in the context of a multi-component SDM implementation program. METHODS: We conducted qualitative process evaluation of a stepped-wedge SDM implementation trial. Qualitative data included interviews with nurses and physicians of participating departments, field notes by the study team, and meeting minutes. Data were analyzed via deductive and inductive qualitative content analysis on basis of the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research (CFIR). RESULTS: Transcripts of 107 interviews with 126 nurses and physicians, 304 pages of field note documentation, and 125 pages of meeting minutes were analyzed. Major factors influencing SDM implementation were found for all domains of the CFIR: a) four regarding characteristics of the individuals involved (e.g., perceived personal relevance, individual motivation to change), b) eleven regarding the inner setting (e.g., leadership engagement, networks and communication, available resources, compatibility with clinical practice), c) two regarding the outer setting (e.g., culture of health care delivery), d) eight regarding characteristics of the intervention (e.g., relative advantage, adaptability), and e) three regarding the implementation process (e.g., integration into existing structures). Furthermore, we found strong interrelations between several of the influencing factors within and between domains. CONCLUSIONS: This comprehensive process evaluation complements the outcome evaluation of the SDM implementation trial and adds to its interpretation. The identified influencing factors can be used for planning, conducting, and evaluating SDM implementation in the future. TRIAL REGISTRATION: clinicaltrials.gov, NCT03393351, registered 8 January 2018, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03393351.

Shared decision-making in routine breast cancer care in Germany-A cross-sectional study.

OBJECTIVE: Many preference-sensitive decisions have to be made in breast cancer care and little is known about the decision-making processes between breast cancer patients and the different health care professionals engaged in their treatment. METHODS: All female breast cancer patients who underwent surgery in four German breast centers between 07/2016 and 12/2018 were invited to fill in a survey. The decision-making process was evaluated using the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and a German measure to assess satisfaction with care (ZAPA). The higher the total score (0-100), the higher the experienced degree of participation and satisfaction, respectively. Participants were asked to separately rate consultations with their inpatient hospital doctors, outpatient gynecologists, outpatient oncologists and primary care providers. An overall mean score for the degree of participation and the satisfaction with care was calculated for each patient across all consultations assessed. Differences between the 4 treating physician groups were analyzed as well. RESULTS: Of 1068 approached patients, 563 with a mean age of 62 and a standard deviation (SD) of 12.2 years filled in the survey (response rate: 53%). The overall SDM-Q-9 score was 73.8 (SD: 20.8). Older patients stated a higher level of participation than younger, different physician groups were rated quite similarly. Overall satisfaction with care was 87.4 (SD: 15.5). CONCLUSIONS: Overall, patients reported to have experienced a high level of shared decision-making (SDM) and were quite satisfied with their treatment. However, we do not know whether non-responders might have had different experiences.

Development and content validity of the Experienced Patient-Centeredness Questionnaire (EPAT)-A best practice example for generating patient-reported measures from qualitative data.

INTRODUCTION: To effectively foster patient-centeredness (PC), it is crucial to measure its implementation. So far, there is no German measure to assess PC comprehensively. The aim of this study is to develop and select items for the Experienced Patient-Centeredness (EPAT) Questionnaire, a patient-reported experience measure (PREM). The EPAT intends to assess PC from the perspective of adult patients treated for different chronic diseases in inpatient and outpatient settings in Germany. Furthermore, we aim at providing a best-practice example for developing PREMs from qualitative data. METHODS: The development process comprised a three-phase mixed-method design: (1) preparation, (2) item generation and (3) item selection and testing of content validity. We generated items using qualitative content analysis based on information from focus groups, key informant interviews and literature search. We selected items using relevance rating and cognitive interviews. Participants were patients from four chronic disease groups (cancer, cardiovascular disease, mental disorder, musculoskeletal disorder) and healthcare experts (e.g., clinicians, researchers, patient representatives). RESULTS: We conducted six focus groups with a total of 40 patients, key informant interviews with 10 experts and identified 48 PREMs from international literature. After team discussion, we reached a preliminary pool of 152 items. We conducted a relevance rating with 32 experts and 34 cognitive interviews with 21 patients. We selected 125 items assessing 16 dimensions of PC and showed high relevance and comprehensibility. CONCLUSIONS: The EPAT questionnaire is currently undergoing psychometric testing. The transparent step-by-step report provides a best practice example that other researchers may consider for developing PREMs. Integrating literature and experts with a strong focus on patient feedback ensured good content validity. The EPAT questionnaire will be helpful in assessing PC in routine clinical practice in inpatient and outpatient settings for research and quality improvement. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients were not involved as active members of the research team. While developing the funding proposal, we informally reached out to several patient organizations who all gave us positive feedback on the study aims, thereby confirming their relevance. Those patient organizations endorsed the funding proposal with formal letters of support and supported recruitment by disseminating advertisements for study participation.

How shared is decision-making in multidisciplinary tumour conferences with patient participation? An observational study.

BACKGROUND: In some breast and gynaecologic cancer centres in Germany, patients participate in their own case discussion in multidisciplinary tumour conferences (MTCs), where treatment recommendations are discussed and finalized. However, the extent to which patients in MTCs are involved in decision-making on treatment recommendations remains largely unexplored. Hence, this study investigates how recommendations are communicated to patients and the extent to which the interactions with patients in MTCs are in line with shared decision-making (SDM). METHODS: In this observational study, we audio-recorded MTCs with patient participation in three breast and gynaecologic cancer centres in Germany. We qualitatively analysed the data with regard to content and linguistic aspects. RESULTS: We analysed 82 case discussions. Recommendations made during MTCs were regarding (i) treatment options, (ii) treatment initiation, (iii) next (treatment) steps and (iv) whether a treatment method should be initiated at all. The decision about recommendations depended in part on patients' preferences or further course/further outcomes. Although the purpose of MTCs is to provide recommendations, some recommendations were framed as the final decision. The majority of the decision-making conversation could be characterized as option talk (78%), during which patients were mostly proposed only one (treatment) option. CONCLUSIONS: This study establishes limited SDM in MTCs with patient participation. By indicating choices and thereby creating awareness of choices among patients, MTCs with patient participation could be used to foster SDM implementation. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Two representatives of a large self-help organization for patients with breast cancer assisted the research project, particularly, in discussing the results.

Translation and psychometric evaluation of the German version of the IcanSDM measure - a cross-sectional study among healthcare professionals.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) between patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) is a key component of patient-centred care. To implement SDM in clinical practice and to evaluate its effects, it is helpful to know about HCPs' perception of SDM barriers. The measure IcanSDM was developed in Canada and assesses the perception of SDM barriers. To our knowledge, no equivalent measure exists in German. Therefore, the aim of this study was to translate and adapt the IcanSDM measure to be used by a German speaking population and evaluate its psychometric properties. METHODS: This is a cross-sectional psychometric study based on a secondary analysis of baseline data from a SDM implementation study. The original 8-item IcanSDM was translated into German using a team translation protocol. We assessed comprehensibility via cognitive interviews with n = 11 HCPs. Based on results of cognitive interviews, the translated IcanSDM version was revised. Two hundred forty-two HCPs filled out the measure. Psychometric analysis included acceptance (completion rate), item characteristics (response distribution, skewness, item difficulties, corrected item-total correlations, inter-item correlations), factorial structure (confirmatory factor analysis (CFA), model fit), and internal consistency (Cronbach's α). RESULTS: We translated and adapted the German IcanSDM successfully except for item 8, which had to be revised after the cognitive interviews. Completion rate was 98%. Skewness of the items ranged between -.797 and 1.25, item difficulties ranged between 21.63 and 70.85, corrected item-total-correlations ranged between .200 and .475, inter-item correlations ranged between .005 and .412. Different models based on CFA results did not provide a valid factorial structure. Cronbach's α ranged between .563 and .651 for different factor models. CONCLUSION: We provide the first German measure for assessing perception of SDM barriers by HCPs. The German IcanSDM is a brief measure with good acceptance. However, we found unsatisfying psychometric properties, which were comparable to results of the original scale. In a next step, the IcanSDM should be further developed and modified and predictive validity should be evaluated.

Adapting the patient and physician versions of the 9-item shared decision making questionnaire for other healthcare providers in Japan.

BACKGROUND: In Japan, the number of older people with various health problems and difficulties in living is increasing. In order to practice patient-centered care for them, not only medical professionals but also multidisciplinary teams including care professionals and patients need to practice shared decision making (SDM) in the context of long-term care. For this reason, a measure of SDM in consultations with healthcare professionals (HCPs) other than physicians is needed. Therefore, this study aimed at adapting the patient and physician versions of the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9, SDM-Q-Doc) for consultations with HCPs other than physicians in Japan. METHODS: A pair of SDM measures that can be used by HCPs other than physicians, "Care SDM-Questionnaire for care receivers (SDM-C-patient)" and "Care SDM-Questionnaire for care providers (SDM-C-provider)" were prepared based on the Japanese versions of the SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc. The internal consistency and conceptual structure of these measures were tested by secondary analysis of data from 496 participants from a workshop on SDM for different HCPs. Measurement invariance were tested by multigroup confirmatory factor analysis (CFA) for the patient (SDM-C-patient and SDM-Q-9) and provider (SDM-C-provider vs. SDM-Q-Doc) versions. RESULTS: Both the Japanese SDM-C-patient and SDM-C-provider demonstrated high internal consistencies (Cronbach's α coefficient was 0.90 and McDonald's ω coefficient was 0.90 for both measures). CFA showed one-factor structures for both measures and original measures for physicians. Moreover, multigroup CFA showed configural and metric invariance between the novel care measures and original physician's measures. CONCLUSIONS: Thus, the novel SDM measures for care providers in Japan as well as the original physician's measures could be used in training setting. As these measures were tested only in a training setting, their reliability and validity as new measures for care should be tested in a clinical setting in future.

Cancer patients' preferred and perceived level of involvement in treatment decision-making: an epidemiological study.

Background: We aimed to analyze preferred and perceived levels of patients' involvement in treatment decision-making in a representative sample of cancer patients.Material and Methods: We conducted a multicenter, epidemiological cross-sectional study with a stratified random sample based on the incidence of cancer diagnoses in Germany. Data were collected between January 2008 and December 2010. Analyses were undertaken between 2017 and 2019. We included 5889 adult cancer patients across all cancer entities and disease stages from 30 acute care hospitals, outpatient facilities, and cancer rehabilitation clinics in five regions in Germany. We used the Control Preferences Scale to assess the preferred level of involvement and the nine-item Shared Decision-Making Questionnaire to assess the perceived level of involvement.Results: About 4020 patients (mean age of 58 years, 51% female) completed the survey. Response rate was 68.3%. About a third each preferred patient-led, shared, or physician-led decision-making. About 50.7% perceived high levels, about a quarter each reported moderate (26.0%) or low (24.3%) levels of shared decision-making. Sex, age, relationship status, education, health care setting, and tumor entity were linked to preferred and/or perceived decision-making. Of those patients who preferred active involvement, about 50% perceived high levels of shared decision-making.Conclusion: The majority of patients with cancer wanted to be involved in medical decisions. Many patients perceived a high level of shared decision-making. However, many patients' level of involvement did not fit their preference. This study provides a solid basis for efforts to improve shared decision-making in German cancer care.

Adaptation and qualitative evaluation of Ask 3 Questions - a simple and generic intervention to foster patient empowerment.

BACKGROUND: Patients are often not actively engaged in medical encounters. Short interventions like Ask 3 Questions (Ask3Q) can increase patient participation in decision-making. Up to now, Ask3Q was not available in German. OBJECTIVE: To translate Ask3Q and evaluate its acceptability and feasibility. METHODS: We translated and adapted several English versions of Ask3Q using a team translation protocol and cognitive interviews. Acceptability and feasibility of the final German Ask3Q version were assessed via focus groups and interviews with patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs). Data were analysed via qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Translation and adaptation were successful. Participants of focus groups and interviews perceived Ask3Q as a tool to empower patients to ask more questions. Moreover, it was seen as a guideline for physicians not to forget conveying important information. Several characteristics of patients, HCPs, the clinical setting and the intervention were identified as facilitators and barriers for an effective implementation of Ask3Q. CONCLUSION: We provide the German version of Ask3Q. According to participants, implementation of Ask3Q in the German healthcare system is feasible. Future studies should evaluate if positive effects of Ask3Q can be replicated for patient participation and communication behaviour of HCPs in Germany.

A skills network approach to physicians' competence in shared decision making.

BACKGROUND: Measurement of physicians' competence in shared decision making (SDM) remains challenging with frequent disagreement between assessment methods. OBJECTIVE: To conceptualize and measure physicians' SDM competence as an organized network of behavioural skills and to determine whether processing patient-reported data according to this model can be used to predict observer-rated competence. DESIGN: Secondary analysis of an observational study. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: Primary and specialty outpatient care physicians and consecutively recruited adult patients with a chronic condition who faced a treatment decision with multiple acceptable choices. MEASURES: Network parameters constructed from patients' assessment of physicians' SDM skills as measured by the 9-item Shared Decision Making Questionnaire (SDM-Q-9) and observer-rated SDM competence of physicians measured by three widely used observer-rated instruments. RESULTS: 29 physicians (12 female, 17 male; mean age 50.3 years) recruited 310 patients (59.4% female, 40.6% male; mean age 54.0 years) facing a decision mainly regarding type 2 diabetes (36.4%), chronic back pain (32.8%) or depressive disorder (26.8%). Although most investigated skills were interrelated, elicitation of the patient's treatment preferences showed the strongest associations with the other skills. Network parameters of this skill were also decisive in predicting observer-rated competence. Correlation between predicted competence scores and observer-rated measurements ranged from 0.710 to 0.785. CONCLUSIONS: Conceptualizing physicians' SDM competence as a network of interacting skills enables the measurement of observer-rated competence using patient-reported data. In addition to theoretical implications for defining and training medical competences, the findings open a new way to measure physicians' SDM competence under routine conditions.

[DNVF Memorandum Health Services Research in Oncology]. / DNVF-Memorandum Versorgungsforschung in der Onkologie.

Health services research in oncology deals with all situations which cancer patients face. It looks at the different phases of care, i. e. prevention / early detection, prehabilitation, diagnostics, therapy, rehabilitation and palliative care as well as the various actors, including those affected, the carers and self-help. It deals with healthy people (e. g. in the context of prevention / early detection), patients and cancer survivors. Due to the nature of cancer and the existing care structures, there are a number of specific contents for health services research in oncology compared to general health services research while the methods remain essentially identical. This memorandum describes the subject, illustrates the care structures and identifies areas of health services research in oncology. This memorandum has been prepared by the Oncology Section of the German Network for Health Services Research and is the result of intensive discussions.

Evaluation of a shared decision-making communication skills training for physicians treating patients with asthma: a mixed methods study using simulated patients.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) is a key principle in asthma management, but continues to be poorly implemented in routine care. This study aimed to evaluate the impact of a SDM communication skills training for physicians treating patients with asthma on the SDM behaviors of physicians, and to analyze physician views on the training. METHODS: A mixed methods study with a partially mixed sequential equal status design was conducted to evaluate a 12 h SDM communication skills training for physicians treating patients with asthma. It included a short introductory talk, videotaped consultations with simulated asthma patients, video analysis in small group sessions, individual feedback, short presentations, group discussions, and practical exercises. The quantitative evaluation phase consisted of a before (t0) after (t1) comparison of SDM performance using the observer-rated OPTION5, the physician questionnaire SDM-Q-Doc, and the patient questionnaire SDM-Q-9, using dependent t-tests. The qualitative evaluation phase (t2) consisted of a content analysis of audiotaped and transcribed interviews. RESULTS: Initially, 29 physicians participated in the study, 27 physicians provided quantitative data, and 22 physicians provided qualitative data for analysis. Quantitative results showed significantly improved performance in SDM following the training (t1) when compared with performance in SDM before the training (t0) (OPTION5: t (26) = - 5.16; p < 0.001) (SDM-Q-Doc: t (26) = - 4.39; p < 0.001) (SDM-Q-9: t (26) = - 5.86; p < 0.001). The qualitative evaluation showed that most physicians experienced a change in attitude and behavior after the training, and positively appraised the training program. Physicians considered simulated patient consultations, including feedback and video analysis, beneficial and suggested the future use of real patient consultations. CONCLUSION: The SDM communication skills training for physicians treating patients with asthma has potential to improve SDM performance, but would benefit from using real patient consultations.

Adaptation and qualitative evaluation of encounter decision aids in breast cancer care.

PURPOSE: Shared decision-making is currently not widely implemented in breast cancer care. Encounter decision aids support shared decision-making by helping patients and physicians compare treatment options. So far, little was known about adaptation needs for translated encounter decision aids, and encounter decision aids for breast cancer treatments were not available in Germany. This study aimed to adapt and evaluate the implementation of two encounter decision aids on breast cancer treatments in routine care. METHODS: We conducted a multi-phase qualitative study: (1) translation of two breast cancer Option Grid™ decision aids; comparison to national clinical standards; cognitive interviews to test patients' understanding; (2) focus groups to assess acceptability; (3) testing in routine care using participant observation. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis. RESULTS: Physicians and patients reacted positively to the idea of encounter decision aids, and reported being interested in using them; patients were most receptive. Several adaptation cycles were necessary. Uncertainty about feasibility of using encounter decision aids in clinical settings was the main physician-reported barrier. During real-world testing (N = 77 encounters), physicians used encounter decision aids in one-third of potentially relevant encounters. However, they did not use the encounter decision aids to stimulate dialogue, which is contrary to their original scope and purpose. CONCLUSIONS: The idea of using encounter decision aids was welcomed, but more by patients than by physicians. Adaptation was a complex process and required resources. Clinicians did not follow suggested strategies for using encounter decision aids. Our study indicates that production of encounter decision aids alone will not lead to successful implementation, and has to be accompanied by training of health care providers.

Psychometric properties of the German version of Observer OPTION5.

BACKGROUND: In order to conduct studies on shared decision-making (SDM) and to implement SDM in routine practice, psychometrically tested measures are needed. The development of the short 5-item version of the OPTION scale (Observer OPTION5) allows to assess SDM from an observer perspective. Observer OPTION5 is so far only available in English and Dutch. The aim of this study was to translate the Observer OPTION5 rating scale into German and to test its psychometric properties. METHODS: The German Observer OPTION5 was tested in a secondary data analysis of audio-recordings of patient-physician-consultations (N = 79) in German primary care practices. Demographic data were analysed using descriptive statistics. To assess inter- and intra-rater reliability, intraclass correlation coefficients (ICCs) were calculated. For assessing concurrent validity, a correlation (Spearman's Rho) of the sum score of Observer OPTION5 and Observer OPTION12 was calculated. RESULTS: The consultations dealt with decisions regarding type 2 diabetes (N = 31), chronic back pain (N = 23), depression (N = 20), and other diseases (N = 5). Analysis of inter-rater reliability yielded an ICC of 0.82 for the sum score; across the five single items ICCs ranged between 0.45 and 0.77. For the intra-rater reliability an ICC of 0.83 was observed for the total score; across the five single items ICCs ranged between 0.45 and 0.86. The Observer OPTION5 had a mean total score of 11.84 (SD = 11.92) and the Observer OPTION12 had a mean total score of 10.3 (SD = 7.9), both on a potential range of 0 to 100. The correlation between the total scores of Observer OPTION5 and Observer OPTION12 was r = 0.47 (p = 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The results regarding inter- and intra-rater reliability were excellent on the total score level. Observer OPTION5 showed moderate concurrent validity using Observer OPTON12. The results are generally comparable to the results of the original English version of Observer OPTION5. The German version of Observer OPTION5 can be used in research and evaluation of clinical practice. Nevertheless, further testing is adviced.

Poynting-Robertson-like Drag at the Sun's Surface.

The Sun's internal rotation Ω(r,Θ) has previously been measured using helioseismology techniques and found to be a complex function of colatitude θ and radius r. From helioseismology and observations of apparently "rooted" solar magnetic tracers, we know that the surface rotates more slowly than much of the interior. The cause of this slow-down is not understood, but it is important for understanding stellar rotation generally and any plausible theory of the solar interior. A new analysis using 5-min solar p-mode limb oscillations as a rotation "tracer" finds an even larger velocity gradient in a thin region at the top of the photosphere. This shear occurs where the solar atmosphere radiates energy and angular momentum. We suggest that the net effect of the photospheric angular momentum loss is similar to Poynting-Robertson "photon braking" on, for example, Sun-orbiting dust. The resultant photospheric torque is readily computed and, over the Sun's lifetime, is found to be comparable to the apparent angular momentum deficit in the near-surface shear layer.

Process quality of decision-making in multidisciplinary cancer team meetings: a structured observational study.

BACKGROUND: The quality of decision-making in multidisciplinary team meetings (MDTMs) depends on the quality of information presented and the quality of team processes. Few studies have examined these factors using a standardized approach. The aim of this study was to objectively document the processes involved in decision-making in MDTMs, document the outcomes in terms of whether a treatment recommendation was given (none vs. singular vs. multiple), and to identify factors related to type of treatment recommendation. METHODS: An adaptation of the observer rating scale Multidisciplinary Tumor Board Metric for the Observation of Decision-Making (MDT-MODe) was used to assess the quality of the presented information and team processes in MDTMs. Data was analyzed using descriptive statistics and mixed logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: N = 249 cases were observed in N = 29 MDTMs. While cancer-specific medical information was judged to be of high quality, psychosocial information and information regarding patient views were considered to be of low quality. In 25% of the cases no, in 64% one, and in 10% more than one treatment recommendations were given (1% missing data). Giving no treatment recommendation was associated with duration of case discussion, duration of the MDTM session, quality of case history, quality of radiological information, and specialization of the MDTM. Higher levels of medical and treatment uncertainty during discussions were found to be associated with a higher probability for more than one treatment recommendation. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of different aspects of information was observed to differ greatly. In general, we did not find MDTMs to be in line with the principles of patient-centered care. Recommendation outcome varied substantially between different specializations of MDTMs. The quality of certain information was associated with the recommendation outcome. Uncertainty during discussions was related to more than one recommendation being considered. Time constraints were found to play an important role. Some of those aspects seem modifiable, which offers possibilities for the reorganization of MDTMs.

Shared Decision Making During Active Psychiatric Hospitalization: Assessment and Psychometric Properties.

Encouraging patients to be involved in their care and enhancing shared decision making (SDM) have been advocated over the past two decades as means to enhance patient-centered care. However, one of the barriers to implementing SDM in medical consultations is the need to adapt this approach to various populations and medical settings, including mental health, and developing reliable and practical methods for measuring and assessing SDM. This article presents the psychometric properties and validity of an adapted scale, SDM-Q-9-Psy, that assesses SDM in routine care among psychiatric inpatients. Psychiatric inpatients were assigned into an SDM intervention cohort (n = 46) or a control cohort (n = 40). The adapted scale was administered after a decision-making process. The scale was subsequently psychometrically tested via factor and reliability analyses. It was also tested for convergent validity and for its ability to distinguish the degree of SDM between the intervention and control groups (construct validity). The SDM-Q-9-Psy scale yielded a Cronbach's α of .94. Convergent and construct validity parameters were good. The SDM-Q-9-Psy scale can be used to evaluate SDM from psychiatric inpatients' perspective and to provide rapid feedback to mental health professionals, enabling them to monitor their decision-making practice in real-time clinical consultations.