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

PURPOSE: 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. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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). CONCLUSIONS: 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.

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

STUDY QUESTION: Does a purpose-designed Decision Aid for women considering elective egg freezing (EEF) impact decisional conflict and other decision-related outcomes? SUMMARY ANSWER: The Decision Aid reduces decisional conflict, prepares women for decision-making, and does not cause distress. WHAT IS ALREADY KNOWN: 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. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: 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. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: 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). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: 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). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: 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. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: 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. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): 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. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: ACTRN12620001032943. TRIAL REGISTRATION DATE: 11 August 2020. DATE OF FIRST PATIENT'S ENROLMENT: 29 September 2020.

The Impact of a Digital Contraceptive Decision Aid on User Outcomes: Results of an Experimental, Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Nearly 40% of unplanned pregnancies in the USA are the result of inconsistent or incorrect contraceptive use. Finding ways to increase women's comfort and satisfaction with contraceptive use is therefore critical to public health. One promising pathway for improving patient outcomes is through the use of digital decision aids that assist women and their physicians in choosing a contraceptive option that women are comfortable with. Testing the ability of these aids to improve patient outcomes is therefore a necessary first step toward incorporating this technology into traditional physician appointments. PURPOSE: To evaluate the effectiveness of a novel contraceptive decision aid at minimizing decisional conflict and increasing comfort with contraception among adult women. METHODS: In total, 310 adult women were assigned to use either the Tuune contraceptive decision aid or a control aid modeled after a leading online contraceptive prescriber's patient intake form. Participants then completed self-report measures of decisional conflict, contraceptive expectations, satisfaction, and contraceptive use intentions. Individual between-subjects analysis of variance (ANOVA) models were used to examine these outcomes. RESULTS: Women using the Tuune decision aid (vs. those using the control aid) reported lower decisional conflict, more positive contraceptive expectations, greater satisfaction with the decision aid and recommendation, and more positive contraceptive use intentions. CONCLUSIONS: Use of Tuune improved each of the predicted patient outcomes relative to a control decision aid. Online decision aids, particularly when used alongside physician consultations, may be an effective tool for increasing comfort with contraceptive use. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION #: NCT05177783, ClinicalTrials.gov, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05177783.

Digital decision aids that help women and their physicians choose contraceptive options that women are most comfortable with present one promising way to improve contraceptive use outcomes, such as avoiding unplanned pregnancies. However, current decision aids have been found to struggle in helping improve women's satisfaction with and confidence in their contraceptive choices. The aim of this study was to test the effectiveness of a new digital decision aid, named Tuune, at helping improve women's confidence and comfort with contraception. Three hundred and ten adult women were randomly assigned to use and then receive a contraceptive recommendation from either the Tuune decision aid or a control aid designed after leading traditional health intake forms. Women's confidence and satisfaction with the aids, as well as their contraceptive recommendation, were then compared between groups. We found good evidence to suggest that women using the Tuune contraceptive decision aid were more satisfied and positive about their contraceptive choices and reported greater intentions to use contraception with increased confidence compared to women who used the control decision aid. New online decision aids, like Tuune, may be an effective tool for increasing women's comfort and experiences using contraception.

Exploring methods of improving patient understanding and communication in a complex anal fistula clinic: results from a randomized controlled feasibility study.

AIM: Patient understanding of disease can guide decision-making in the management of anal fistula. This prospective feasibility study aimed to assess the acceptability and methods of assessing the impact of viewing realistic models on patients with anal fistula. METHODS: New referrals to a tertiary clinic participated in this single-centre, parallel-group randomized controlled study. Baseline characteristics, Decisional Conflict Scale and understanding of disease were assessed pre-consultation. Participants were randomized to a standard consultation, where disease and treatment options were explained using magnetic resonance images and drawn diagrams, or a similar consultation supplemented with an appropriate generic three-dimensional (3D) printed model. Understanding of disease and proposed surgery, Decisional Conflict Scale and ratings of visual aids were assessed post-consultation, along with 3D model feedback. RESULTS: All 52 patients who were approached agreed to be randomized (25 standard, 27 3D consultation). Understanding of disease increased post-consultation in both groups. Post-consultation decisional conflict (0, no; 100, high decisional conflict) was low (median 27 post-standard vs. 24 post-3D consultation). Patients scored highly on measures assessing understanding of proposed surgery. 3D models were rated highly, with 96% of patients wanting to see them again in future consultations. CONCLUSIONS: Three-dimensional printed fistula models are a welcome addition to outpatient consultations with results suggesting that understanding of surgery is improved. A future trial should be powered to detect whether 3D models result in a significant improvement in understanding beyond traditional methods of explanation and explore the conditions in which models have their maximal utility. GOV REGISTRATION ID: This study was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (ID: NCT04069728). Registered on 23 August 2019.

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

PURPOSE: Women 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. METHODS: A 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. RESULTS: 45% (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. CONCLUSION: Younger 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 REGISTRATION: The IRB number is 10678.

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

OBJECTIVE: 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. METHODS: 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. RESULTS: 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. CONCLUSION: 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. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: 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.

On subjective measures of decision quality.

In times of person-centered care, it is all the more important to support patients in making good decisions about their care. One way to offer such support to patients is by way of Patient Decision Aids (PDAs). Ranging from patient brochures to web-based tools, PDAs explicitly state the decisions patients face, inform them about their medical options, help them to clarify and discuss their values, and ultimately make a decision. However, lingering discussions surround effectiveness research on PDAs. In this article, I focus on two subjective measures of decision quality that are widely used as outcome measures in effectiveness research on PDAs (i.e., the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and measures of regret). Although these measurement instruments have attracted critical attention in the scientific literature, bioethicists have hardly engaged with them. Therefore, I set myself to analyze the relationship between (the different subscales of) the DCS and measures of regret, on the one hand, and ethical principles such as beneficence and autonomy, on the other hand. In light of that analysis, I will clarify some discussions regarding the use of these measures of decision quality in effectiveness research on PDAs. This should help us to align the way we evaluate PDAs with ethical principles and avoid that our attempts to support patients in making good decisions about their care that is so central to person-centered care point in unethical directions.

Pregnant individuals' genetic literacy and decisional conflict about prenatal screening tests: A cross-sectional study.

Understanding the prenatal screening and diagnostic tests performed during pregnancy and making a decision in line with the test results can be a complex process for pregnant individuals and their families. Therefore, this study examined pregnant individuals' genetic literacy and decisional conflict regarding prenatal screening tests. The study was conducted with 328 pregnant individuals who applied to a training and research hospital to receive antenatal care between April 05 and September 30, 2021. Research data were collected by using the "Decisional Conflict Scale," "SURE Scale," and "Genetic Literacy and Comprehension Measure." The mean age of the participants was 28.69 ± 5.48, and the mean gestational week was 25.90 ± 10.43. A statistically significant difference was found between the educational levels of the pregnant individuals and the genetic literacy and comprehension scales (p < 0.001). A statistically significant difference was found between getting information about prenatal screening tests, having a screening test and decisional conflict scale, SURE Scale, and genetic literacy and comprehension scales (p < 0.001). A weak, negative, statistically significant correlation was found between the genetic literacy and comprehension familiarity and decision conflict scales (r = -0.177, p = 0.001). It is well known that pregnant individuals have difficulty understanding and interpreting test results due to prenatal screening tests that include genetic information. In our study, approximately half of the pregnant individuals received information about prenatal screening tests. Therefore, prenatal care must include the necessary information about prenatal screening tests. The study found that as the genetic literacy of pregnant individuals increased, the conflict of decisions they experienced decreased. Accordingly, it is suggested that interventions to increase genetic literacy among pregnant individuals may be effective in reducing decisional conflict regarding prenatal screening tests.

The Impact of a Computer-Based Interactive Informed Consent for Surgery on Decision Conflict.

PURPOSE: Informed consent for surgery can address the legal aspects of care while also being simple, informative, and empathic. We developed interactive informed consents and compared them with standard printed informed consents asking: (1) are there any factors associated with lower decision conflict or greater patient-rated clinician empathy including consent format? (2) Are there any factors associated with rating the consent process as informative, comfortable, and satisfying including consent format? METHODS: Ninety-four adult patients accepted an offer of surgery from one of three hand surgeons to address one of six common hand surgery diagnoses: carpal tunnel release, cubital tunnel release, trigger finger release, plate and screw fixation of a distal radius fracture, removal of a benign mass, including a ganglion cyst, and Dupuytren contracture release. Fifty-three patients were randomized to complete an interactive consent, and 41, a standard written consent. Symptoms of anxiety, depression, and unhelpful thoughts were measured. Patients completed the Decision Conflict Scale and the Jefferson Scale of Patient's Perceptions of Physician Empathy and rated the consent as informative, comfortable, and satisfactory on a scale of 0-10. RESULTS: Greater decisional conflict was slightly associated with greater patient unhelpful thoughts about symptoms and was not associated with consent format. A higher rating of comfort with the consent process was slightly associated with patient choice to proceed with surgical treatment, but not with consent format. Accounting for potential confounding in multivariable analysis, a higher rating of the consent process as informative was slightly associated with patient preference for surgical over nonsurgical treatment, CONCLUSIONS: The observation that an interactive consent form was not related to decision conflict or other aspects of patient experience suggests that such tools may not have much weight relative to the interaction between patient and clinician. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: Efforts to improve informed consent may need to focus on the dialog between patient and surgeon rather than how information is presented.

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

BACKGROUND: Advances 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. METHODS: This 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. RESULTS: The 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. CONCLUSION: The use of a SIC checklist in the EICU reduced the DCS score by increasing medical information disclosure, patient value awareness, and decision-making support.

Informed Consent for Psychotherapy: The Moderating Role of Therapeutic Alliance, Prior Knowledge and Autonomous Motivation on Decision-Making and Treatment Expectation.

BACKGROUND: Informed consent is an ethical prerequisite for psychotherapy. There are no routinely used standardized strategies for obtaining informed consent. A new optimized informed consent consultation (OIC) strengthened treatment-relevant aspects. It remains unclear which factors influence the OIC efficacy regarding clinical and decision-related outcomes. METHODS: N = 122 adults were included in a randomized controlled online trial. Participants received an information brochure on psychotherapy (TAU; n = 61) or OIC + TAU (n = 61). The main and interaction effects of group allocation, therapeutic alliance, prior knowledge about psychotherapy and treatment motivation on treatment expectations, decisional conflict and capacity to consent were tested. Floodlight analyses were conducted for significant interactions. RESULTS: Large interaction effects were shown between treatment motivation and group allocation on treatment expectations (ß = -0.53) and between prior knowledge and group assignment on capacity to consent (ß = 0.68). The interaction between treatment motivation and group allocation was significant up to a motivation score of 5.54 (range: 1-7). The interaction between prior knowledge and group assignment was significant up to a knowledge score of 14.38 (range: 5-20). CONCLUSION: Moderator analyses indicated varying efficacy degrees for the OIC regarding decisional outcomes and expectation. Especially patients with little treatment motivation or low prior knowledge benefited from optimized information about the efficacy and possible side effects of psychotherapy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PsychArchives (https://doi.org/10.23668/psycharchives.4929): 17.06.2021.

Decision making in metoidioplasty and phalloplasty gender-affirming surgery: a mixed methods study.

BACKGROUND: Gender-affirming surgical procedures, such as metoidioplasty and phalloplasty for those assigned female at birth, are complex and multistaged and involve risks. Individuals considering these procedures experience greater uncertainty or decisional conflict, compounded by difficulty finding trustworthy information. AIM: (1) To explore the factors contributing to decisional uncertainty and the needs of individuals considering metoidioplasty and phalloplasty gender-affirming surgery (MaPGAS) and (2) to inform development of a patient-centered decision aid. METHODS: This cross-sectional study was based on mixed methods. Adult transgender men and nonbinary individuals assigned female at birth at various stages of MaPGAS decision making were recruited from 2 study sites in the United States to participate in semistructured interviews and an online gender health survey, which included measures of gender congruence, decisional conflict, urinary health, and quality of life. Trained qualitative researchers conducted all interviews with questions to explore constructs from the Ottawa decision support framework. OUTCOMES: Outcomes included goals and priorities for MaPGAS, expectations, knowledge, and decisional needs, as well as variations in decisional conflict by surgical preference, surgical status, and sociodemographic variables. RESULTS: We interviewed 26 participants and collected survey data from 39 (24 interviewees, 92%) at various stages of MaPGAS decision making. In surveys and interviews, affirmation of gender identity, standing to urinate, sensation, and the ability to "pass" as male emerged as highly important factors for deciding to undergo MaPGAS. A third of survey respondents reported decisional conflict. Triangulation of data from all sources revealed that conflict emerged most when trying to balance the strong desire to resolve gender dysphoria through surgical transition against the risks and unknowns in urinary and sexual function, appearance, and preservation of sensation post-MaPGAS. Insurance coverage, age, access to surgeons, and health concerns further influenced surgery preferences and timing. CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS: The findings add to the understanding of decisional needs and priorities of those considering MaPGAS while revealing new complexities among knowledge, personal factors, and decisional uncertainty. STRENGTHS AND LIMITATIONS: This mixed methods study was codeveloped by members of the transgender and nonbinary community and yielded important guidance for providers and individuals considering MaPGAS. The results provide rich qualitative insights for MaPGAS decision making in US contexts. Limitations include low diversity and sample size; both are being addressed in work underway. CONCLUSIONS: This study increases understanding of the factors important to MaPGAS decision making, and results are being used to guide development of a patient-centered surgical decision aid and informed survey revision for national distribution.

Validation of two brief instruments (the SURE and CollaboRATE) to measure shared decision-making in patients with restless legs syndrome.

Restless legs syndrome (RLS) is a common neurological disorder characterised by an urge to move arms and legs, usually associated with discomfort, pain, motor restlessness, and sleep disturbance. An individually adapted treatment is needed but difficult to optimise, which makes shared decision-making (SDM) important. However, brief validated instruments on how patients with RLS perceive their involvement in treatment decisions are lacking. Therefore, the aim was to validate two instruments, SURE (Sure of myself, Understand information, Risk-benefit ratio, Encouragement, i.e., to assess decisional conflict) and CollaboRATE (brief patient survey focused on SDM, i.e., to assess SDM), in patients with RLS. A cross-sectional design, including 788 participants with RLS (65% females, mean [SD] age 70.8 [11.4] years) from a national patient organisation for RLS, was used. A postal survey was sent out to collect data regarding weight, height, comorbidities, demographics, and RLS-related treatment data. The following instruments were included: the SURE, CollaboRATE, Restless Legs Syndrome-6 Scale, and eHealth Literacy Scale. Confirmatory factor analysis and Rasch models were used to assess the validity and reliability of the SURE and CollaboRATE. Measurement invariance, unidimensionality, and differential item functioning (DIF) across age, gender, and medication groups were assessed. The SURE and CollaboRATE were both identified as unidimensional instruments with satisfactory internal consistency. No DIF across age and gender was identified, while significant DIF was observed for both the SURE and CollaboRATE regarding medication use categories. However, both the SURE and CollaboRATE are potential instruments to be used in research, but also as reflection tools by healthcare professionals, patients, and students to explore and assess SDM, and support its development in clinical care.

Development and Feasibility Testing of a Decision Aid for Acute Appendicitis.

INTRODUCTION: Patients with acute uncomplicated appendicitis will be increasingly asked to choose between surgery and antibiotic management. We developed a novel decision aid for patients in the emergency department (ED) with acute appendicitis who are facing this choice. We describe the development of the decision aid and an initial feasibility study of its implementation in a busy tertiary care ED. MATERIALS AND METHODS: We conducted a prepost survey analysis comparing patients before and after standardized implementation of the decision aid. Patients were surveyed about their experience making treatment decisions after discharge from the hospital. The primary outcome measure was the total score on the decisional conflict scale (; 0-100; lower scores better). RESULTS: The study included 24 participants (12 in the predecision aid period; 12 in the post period). Only 33% of participants in each group knew antibiotics were a treatment option prior to arriving at the ED. Prior to implementing the use of decision aid, only 75% of patients reported being told antibiotics were a treatment option, while this increased to 100% after implementation of the decision aid. The mean total decisional conflict scalescores were similar in the pre and post periods (mean difference = 0.13, 95% CI: -13 - 13, P > 0.9). CONCLUSIONS: This novel appendicitis decision aid was effectively integrated into clinical practice and helped toinform patients about multiple treatment options. These data support further large-scale testing of the decision aid as part of standardized pathways for the management of patients with acute appendicitis.

Decisional conflict, caregiver mastery, and depression among Chinese parental caregivers of children with leukemia.

BACKGROUND: Informal caregivers of children with leukemia can be emotionally and psychiatrically vulnerable when facing difficult treatment decisions (e.g., chemotherapy, targeted therapy, radiation, transplantation). A common behavioral manifestation of decisional conflict is the verbalized expression of uncertainty about which medical treatment plan to take. The study aims to examine the associations between decisional conflict, mastery, and depressive symptoms among parental caregivers of children with leukemia in China. It explored the mediating role of mastery in the relationship. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey design was adopted. A total of 386 parental caregivers were recruited, and 325 valid questionnaires remained. The mean age of caregivers was 37.7 years, and 61.5% caregivers were female. We used Question Format Decisional Conflict Scale to assess decisional conflict, Pearlin's Mastery Scale to assess mastery, and Center for Epidemiological Studies Depression 10 to assess depressive symptoms. We used mediation analyses to test the mediating effect of mastery. RESULTS: The total score of decisional conflict scale, along with its dimensions of uncertainty, support, and effective decision were found negatively associated with depressive symptoms. In contrast, the dimension of information and value were not significantly associated with depressive symptoms. Mediation analyses demonstrated the direct effects of overall decisional conflict and uncertainly were fully mediated by mastery, while the direct effect of support and effective decision were partially mediated. CONCLUSIONS: Efforts should be made to alleviate parental caregivers' decisional conflict and enhance sense of mastery. Particular attention should be paid to the psycho-social support to relieve uncertainties and ineffectiveness in decision making.

Assessing decisional conflict and challenges in decision-making among perinatal women using or considering using antidepressants during pregnancy-a mixed-methods study.

This study aims to investigate decisional conflict and elucidate challenges in decision-making among perinatal women using or considering using antidepressant (AD) during pregnancy. A sequential, mixed-methods study was employed among pregnant and postnatal women in Norway who had been offered ADs in the last 5 years. Quantitative data were obtained through an electronic questionnaire. Decisional conflict in pregnancy was assessed using the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) defined as either low (< 25) or moderate-high ( ≥ 25) (evaluated retrospectively for postnatal women). Logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with moderate-high decisional conflict. Qualitative data were collected through focus groups with pregnant and postnatal women, and an inductive approach was used for data analysis. Among 174 pregnant and 102 postnatal women, 67.8% and 69.6%, respectively, reported moderate-high decisional conflict during pregnancy. Unsatisfactory doctor-patient relationship was associated with greater likelihood of having moderate-high decisional conflict in pregnancy, both in pregnant (aOR = 1.20, 95% CI: 1.00-1.44) and postnatal women (aOR = 1.40, 95% CI: 1.08-1.82). Reported barriers to decision-making regarding AD use in pregnancy encompassed five DCS subscales: uninformed knowledge following contradictory research and unfamiliarity with authorised resources, unclear values due to emotional blunting and fear associated with AD use, inadequate support, uncertainty in decisions and ineffective decisions due to difficulty in finding personalised treatment, and diverging recommendations by the healthcare providers (HCPs). The quality of the interaction with the HCP plays a crucial role in managing decisional conflict and supporting informed decisions in the management of perinatal mental illness. This study highlights the need for increased provision of clear, evidence-based information by HCPs to facilitate shared decision-making and create personalised treatments for perinatal women considering AD use during pregnancy.

The effects of an online decision aid to support the reproductive decision-making process of genetically at risk couples-A pilot study.

Couples at risk of transmitting a genetic disease to their offspring may experience doubts about their reproductive options. This study examines the effects of an online decision aid (DA) on the (joint) reproductive decision-making process of couples (not pregnant at time of inclusion) at risk of transmitting a genetic disease to their offspring. The primary outcome is decisional conflict, and secondary outcomes are knowledge, realistic expectations, deliberation, joint informed decision-making, and decisional self-efficacy. These outcomes were measured with a pretest-posttest design: before use (T0), after use (T1), and 2 weeks after use (T2) of the decision aid (DA). Usability of the DA was assessed at T1. Paired sample t-tests were used to compute differences between baseline and subsequent measurements. The comparisons of T0-T1 and T0-T2 indicate a significant reduction in mean decisional conflict scores with stronger effects for participants with high baseline decisional conflict scores. Furthermore, use of the DA led to increased knowledge, improved realistic expectations, and increased levels of deliberation, with higher increase in participants with low baseline scores. Decision self-efficacy only improved for participants with lower baseline scores. Participants indicated that the information in the DA was comprehensible and clearly organized. These first results indicate that this online DA is an appropriate tool to support couples at risk of transmitting a genetic disease and a desire to have (a) child(ren) in their reproductive decision-making process.

A Web-Based Decision Aid for Informed Prostate Cancer Screening: Development and Pilot Evaluation.

BACKGROUND: Prostate-specific antigen-based routine screening is not recommended for the general population due to conflicting results with mortality reduction. We aimed to develop a web-based decision aid (DA) for informed decision making for prostate cancer screening. METHODS: Using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) development process model, we developed our DA based on patient and clinician interviews and multidisciplinary expert discussions. The prototype consisted of predicting individual prostate cancer risk and informed decision-making, including knowledge, risk and benefit, cost, personal value, and decision making. We conducted a pilot study on 101 healthy men, evaluating the effectiveness of DA by measuring knowledge, attitude, and intention to screen before and after using the DA, as well as decisional conflict and usefulness after using the DA. RESULTS: Of the 101 participants (median age 60 [50-69] years), 84% had not undergone screening for prostate cancer in the past two years. After using the DA, knowledge on prostate cancer screening increased (mean score [of 10] before versus after: 6.85 ± 1.03 versus 7.57 ± 1.25; P < 0.001), and intention to not screen increased from 27.7% to 51.5% (P < 0.001), but attitude toward screening did not change (P = 0.564). After use of the DA, 79 participants reported no decisional conflict, and the usefulness score was high (mean score [of 100] 77.35 ± 7.69), with 85% of participants reporting that the DA helped with decision making. CONCLUSION: Our web-based DA yielded increased knowledge, decreased screening intention, and high perceived usefulness. These findings indicate potential clinical relevance, especially among younger individuals.

Assessment of a venous thromboembolism prophylaxis shared decision-making intervention (DASH-TOP) using the decisional conflict scale: a mixed-method study.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism (VTE) in pregnancy is a major cause of maternal morbidity and death. The use of low-molecular-weight heparin (LMWH), despite being the standard of care to prevent VTE, comes with some challenges. Shared decision-making (SDM) interventions are recommended to support patients and clinicians in making preference-sensitive decisions. The quality of the SDM process has been widely assessed with the decisional conflict scale (DCS). Our aim is to report participants' perspectives of each of the components of an SDM intervention (DASH-TOP) in relation to the different subscales of the DCS. METHODS: Design: A convergent, parallel, mixed-methods design. PARTICIPANTS: The sample consisted of 22 health care professionals, students of an Applied Clinical Research in Health Sciences (ICACS) master program. INTERVENTION: We randomly divided the participants in three groups: Group 1 received one component (evidence -based information), Group 2 received two components (first component and value elicitation exercises), and Group 3 received all three components (the first two and a decision analysis recommendation) of the SDM intervention. ANALYSIS: For the quantitative strand, we used a non-parametric test to analyze the differences in the DCS subscales between the three groups. For the qualitative strand, we conducted a content analysis using the decisional conflict domains to deductively categorize the responses. RESULTS: Groups that received more intervention components experienced less conflict and better decision-making quality, although the differences between groups were not statistically significant. The decision analysis recommendation improved the efficacy with the decision-making process, however there are some challenges when implementing it in clinical practice. The uncertainty subscale showed a high decisional conflict for all three groups; contributing factors included low certainty of the evidence-based information provided and a perceived small effect of the drug to reduce the risk of a VTE event. CONCLUSIONS: The DASH-TOP intervention reduced decisional conflict in the decision -making process, with decision analysis being the most effective component to improve the quality of the decision. There is a need for more implementation research to improve the delivery of SDM interventions in the clinical encounter.

Effectiveness of evidence-based decision aids for women with pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants in the german health care context: results from a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Women with pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants are at high risk for breast and ovarian cancer. Preventive options include risk-reducing breast and ovarian surgeries and intensified breast surveillance. However, individual decision-making is often associated with decisional conflicts. Two evidence-based decision aids have recently been developed for these women (healthy or with unilateral breast cancer) for the German context to support them in their decision-making process. This study evaluated their effectiveness. METHODS: In a randomized controlled study, women (aged 18-70 years) with pathogenic BRCA1 or BRCA2 variants were randomly assigned 1:1 to the intervention (IG, n = 230) or control (CG, n = 220) group. All participants received usual care. After baseline survey (t0), IG participants additionally received the DAs. Follow-up surveys were at three (t1) and six (t2) months. Primary outcome was decisional conflict at t1. Secondary analyses included decision status, decision regret, knowledge on risks and preventive options, self-reported psychological symptoms, acceptability of DAs, and preparation for decision-making. RESULTS: Of 450 women recruited, 417 completed t0, 398 completed t1 and 386 completed t2. Compared to CG, IG participants had lower decisional conflict scores at t1 (p = 0.049) and t2 (p = 0.006) and higher scores for knowledge (p = 0.004), acceptability (p = 0.000), and preparation for decision-making (p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: These DAs can help improve key parameters of decision-making in women with pathogenic BRCA1 and BRCA2 variants and, thus, provide a useful add-on to the current counseling and care concept for these women in Germany. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register, DRKS-ID: DRKS00015823, retrospectively registered 14/06/2019.