Patient and physician perspectives on treatments for low-risk prostate cancer: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with low-risk prostate cancer (PCa) are confronted with a difficult decision regarding whether to undergo definitive treatment or to pursue an active surveillance protocol. This is potentially further complicated by the possibility that patients and physicians may place different value on factors that influence this decision. We conducted a qualitative investigation to better understand patient and physician perceptions of factors influencing treatment decisions for low-risk PCa. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted among 43 racially and ethnically diverse patients diagnosed with low-risk PCa, who were identified through a population-based cancer registry, and 15 physicians who were selected to represent a variety of practice settings in the Greater San Francisco Bay Area. RESULTS: Patients and physicians both described several key individual (e.g., clinical) and interpersonal (e.g., healthcare communications) factors as important for treatment decision-making. Overall, physicians' perceptions largely mirrored patients' perceptions. First, we observed differences in treatment preferences by age and stage of life. At older ages, there was a preference for less invasive options. However, at younger ages, we found varying opinions among both patients and physicians. Second, patients and physicians both described concerns about side effects including physical functioning and non-physical considerations. Third, we observed differences in expectations and the level of difficulty for clinical conversations based on information needs and resources between patients and physicians. Finally, we discovered that patients and physicians perceived patients' prior knowledge and the support of family/friends as facilitators of clinical conversations. CONCLUSIONS: Our study suggests that the gap between patient and physician perceptions on the influence of clinical and communication factors on treatment decision-making is not large. The consensus we observed points to the importance of developing relevant clinical communication roadmaps as well as high quality and accessible patient education materials.

The Impact of Within-Consultation and Preconsultation Decision Aids for Localized Prostate Cancer on Patient Knowledge: Results of a Patient-Level Randomized Trial.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the role of timing (either before or during initial consultation) on the effectiveness of decision aids (DAs) to support shared-decision-making in a minority-enriched sample of patients with localized prostate cancer using a patient-level randomized controlled trial design. METHODS: We conducted a 3-arm, patient-level-randomized trial in urology and radiation oncology practices in Ohio, South Dakota, and Alaska, testing the effect of preconsultation and within-consultation DAs on patient knowledge elements deemed essential to make treatment decisions about localized prostate cancer, all measured immediately following the initial urology consultation using a 12-item Prostate Cancer Treatment Questionnaire (score range 0 [no questions correct] to 1 [all questions correct]), compared to usual care (no DAs). RESULTS: Between 2017 and 2018, 103 patients-including 16 Black/African American and 17 American Indian or Alaska Native men-were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive usual care (n = 33) or usual care and a DA before (n = 37) or during (n = 33) the consultation. After adjusting for baseline characteristics, there were no statistically significant proportional score differences in patient knowledge between the preconsultation DA arm (0.06 knowledge change, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.12, P = .1) or the within-consultation DA arm (0.04 knowledge change, 95% CI -0.03 to 0.11, P = .3) and usual care. CONCLUSION: In this trial oversampling minority men with localized prostate cancer, DAs presented at different times relative to the specialist consultation showed no improvement in patient knowledge above usual care.

Effects of Smoking on SARS-CoV-2 Positivity: A Study of a Large Health System in Northern and Central California.

Introduction: COVID-19 continues to impact vulnerable populations disproportionally. Identifying modifiable risk factors could lead to targeted interventions to reduce infections. The purpose of this study is to identify risk factors for testing positive for SARS-CoV-2. Methods: Using electronic health records collected from a large ambulatory care system in northern and central California, the study identified patients who had a test for SARS-CoV-2 between 2/20/2020 and 3/31/2021. The adjusted effect of active and passive smoking and other risk factors on the probability of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 were estimated using multivariable logistic regression. Analyses were conducted in 2021. Results: Of 556 690 eligible patients in our sample, 70 564 (12.7%) patients tested positive for SARS-CoV-2. Younger age, being male, racial/ethnic minorities, and having mild major comorbidities were significantly associated with a positive SARS-CoV-2 test. Current smokers (adjusted OR: 0.69, 95% CI: 0.66-0.73) and former smokers (adjusted OR: 0.92, 95% CI: 0.89-0.95) were less likely than nonsmokers to be lab-confirmed positive, but no statistically significant differences were found when comparing passive smokers with non-smokers. The patients with missing smoking status (25.7%) were more likely to be members of vulnerable populations with major comorbidities (adjusted OR ranges from severe: 2.52, 95% CI = 2.36-2.69 to mild: 3.28, 95% CI = 3.09-3.48), lower income (adjusted OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.85-0.86), aged 80 years or older (adjusted OR: 1.11, 95% CI: 1.07-1.16), have less access to primary care (adjusted OR: 0.07, 95% CI: 0.07-0.07), and identify as racial ethnic minorities (adjusted OR ranges from Hispanic: 1.61, 95% CI = 1.56-1.65 to Non-Hispanic Black: 2.60, 95% CI = 2.5-2.69). Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the odds of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 were significantly lower in smokers compared to nonsmokers. Other risk factors include missing data on smoking status, being under 18, being male, being a racial/ethnic minority, and having mild major comorbidities. Since those with missing data on smoking status were more likely to be members of vulnerable populations with higher smoking rates, the risk of testing positive for SARS-CoV-2 among smokers may have been underestimated due to missing data on smoking status. Future studies should investigate the risk of severe outcomes among active and passive smokers, the role that exposure to tobacco smoke constitutes among nonsmokers, the role of comorbidities in COVID-19 disease course, and health disparities experienced by disadvantaged groups.

Colorectal Cancer Screening During the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Shared decision-making (SDM) can help patients make good decisions about preventive health interventions such as cancer screening. We illustrate the use of SDM in the case of a 53-year-old man who had a new patient visit with a primary care physician and had never been screened for colorectal cancer (CRC). The patient had recently recovered from a serious COVID-19 infection requiring weeks of mechanical ventilation. When the primary care physician initially offered a screening colonoscopy, the man expressed great reluctance to return to the hospital for the exam. The PCP then offered a stool test, which could be completed at home, but emphasized that if it were positive, a colonoscopy would be required. He agreed to complete the stool test, and unfortunately, it was positive. He then agreed to undergo colonoscopy, which uncovered a large rectal cancer. The carcinoma had invaded the mesorectal fat but there were no metastases. After undergoing neoadjuvant chemotherapy followed by a low anterior resection of the tumor, he has no evidence of recurrence so far. Many clinicians favor colonoscopy for CRC screening, but evidence suggests that patients who are offered more than one reasonable option are more likely to undergo screening. If screening had been delayed in this patient until he was willing to accept a screening colonoscopy, there was the potential the cancer may have been more advanced when diagnosed, with a worse outcome. Shared decision-making was a key approach to understanding the patient's feelings related to this screening decision and making a decision consistent with his preferences.

Patient Preferences for Preventive Healthcare During the COVID-19 Pandemic in a Large Integrated Health System.

The COVID-19 pandemic caused healthcare systems and patients to cancel or postpone healthcare services, particularly preventive care. Many patients still have not received these services raising concerns about the potential for preventable morbidity and mortality. At Sutter Health, a large integrated healthcare system in Northern California, we conducted a population-based email survey in August 2020 to evaluate perceptions and preferences about where, when, and how healthcare is delivered during the COVID-19 pandemic. In total, 3351 patients completed surveys, and 42.6% reported that they would "wait until they felt safe" before receiving a colonoscopy as compared to 22.4% for a mammogram. The doctor's office was the most common preferred location for receiving vaccines/shots (79.9%), though many also reported preferring an outdoor setting or in a car (63.7%). With over 40% of patients reporting that they would "wait until they feel safe" for a colonoscopy, healthcare systems could focus on promoting other evidence-based options such a fecal-occult blood test to ensure timely colon cancer screening.

Decision aids for localized prostate cancer in diverse minority men: Primary outcome results from a multicenter cancer care delivery trial (Alliance A191402CD).

BACKGROUND: Decision aids (DAs) can improve knowledge for prostate cancer treatment. However, the relative effects of DAs delivered within the clinical encounter and in more diverse patient populations are unknown. A multicenter cluster randomized controlled trial with a 2×2 factorial design was performed to test the effectiveness of within-visit and previsit DAs for localized prostate cancer, and minority men were oversampled. METHODS: The interventions were delivered in urology practices affiliated with the NCI Community Oncology Research Program Alliance Research Base. The primary outcome was prostate cancer knowledge (percent correct on a 12-item measure) assessed immediately after a urology consultation. RESULTS: Four sites administered the previsit DA (39 patients), 4 sites administered the within-visit DA (44 patients), 3 sites administered both previsit and within-visit DAs (25 patients), and 4 sites provided usual care (50 patients). The median percent correct in prostate cancer knowledge, based on the postvisit knowledge assessment after the intervention delivery, was as follows: 75% for the pre+within-visit DA study arm, 67% for the previsit DA only arm, 58% for the within-visit DA only arm, and 58% for the usual-care arm. Neither the previsit DA nor the within-visit DA had a significant impact on patient knowledge of prostate cancer treatments at the prespecified 2.5% significance level (P = .132 and P = .977, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: DAs for localized prostate cancer treatment provided at 2 different points in the care continuum in a trial that oversampled minority men did not confer measurable gains in prostate cancer knowledge.

Development of a patient decision aid for the management of superficial basal cell carcinoma (BCC) in adults with a limited life expectancy.

BACKGROUND: Basal cell carcinoma (BCC) is a slow-growing, rarely lethal skin cancer that affects people 65 years or older. A range of treatment options exist for BCC, but there is little evidence available to guide patients and providers in selecting the best treatment options. OBJECTIVES: This study outlines the development of a patient decision aid (PDA) for low-risk BCC that can be used by patients and providers to assist in shared decision-making. METHODS: In accordance with the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration framework, feedback from focus groups and semi-structured interviews with patients and providers, an initial prototype of the PDA was developed. This was tested using cognitive interviews and iteratively updated. RESULTS: We created eighteen different iterations using feedback from 24 patients and 34 providers. The key issues identified included: 1) Addressing fear of cancer; 2) Communicating risk and uncertainty; 3) Values clarification; and 4) Time lag to benefit. LIMITATIONS: The PDA does not include all possible treatment options and is currently paper based. CONCLUSIONS: Our PDA has been specifically adapted and designed to support patients with a limited life expectancy in making decisions about their low risk BCC together with their doctors.

Perioperative Complications Stratified by Body Mass Index for the Direct Anterior Approach to Total Hip Arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND: Previous studies have addressed the increased risk of perioperative complications in the obese and morbidly obese populations undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Over the last 15 years, the direct anterior approach has increased in popularity. The purpose of this study is to compare the 90-day perioperative complication rate of total hip arthroplasty performed through the direct anterior approach stratified by body mass index (BMI). METHODS: Perioperative complications both intraoperative and up to 90 days postoperative were identified in a case series of 1808 primary total hip arthroplasties performed through a direct anterior approach. The patients were stratified according to BMI. Demographics of age, side, sex, and American Society of Anesthesiologists score were recorded. Medical and surgical complications including National Surgical Quality Improvement Program complications, length of stay, reoperation rate, readmission rate, and length of operation were recorded. Bivariate analysis and analysis of variance were performed. RESULTS: Morbidly obese patients (BMI > 40) demonstrated increased American Society of Anesthesiologists scores, increased surgical times with statistically significant increase in number of patients with surgical complications, National Surgical Quality Improvement Program complications, deep infection, and wound breakdown. Grading the severity of complications also demonstrated the morbidly obese had a higher risk of experiencing more severe complications. Underweight patients (BMI < 18.5) demonstrated a statistically significant readmission rate. CONCLUSION: In stratifying patients undergoing the direct anterior approach for total hip arthroplasty by BMI, a greater rate of surgical complications both in number and in severity occurs with the morbidly obese undergoing total hip arthroplasty through a direct anterior approach.

Engaging Patients in Decisions About Cancer Screening: Exploring the Decision Journey Through the Use of a Patient Portal.

INTRODUCTION: Engaging patients to make informed choices is paramount but difficult in busy practices. This study sought to engage patients outside the clinical setting to better understand how they approach cancer screening decisions, including their primary concerns and their preferences for finalizing their decision. METHODS: Twelve primary care practices offering patients an online personal health record invited eligible patients to complete a 17-item online interactive module. Among 11,458 registered users, invitations to complete the module were sent to adults aged 50-74 years who were overdue for colorectal cancer screening and to women aged 40-49 years and men aged 55-69 who had not undergone a recent mammogram or prostate-specific antigen test, respectively. RESULTS: The module was started by 2,355 patients and completed by 903 patients. Most respondents (76.8%) knew they were eligible for screening. Preferred next steps were talking to the clinician (76.6%), reading/research (28.6%), and consulting trusted friends/family (16.4%). Priority topics included how much screening improves life expectancy, comparative test performance, and the prevalence/health risks of the cancer. Leading fears were getting cancer/delayed detection (79.2%), abnormal results (40.5%), and testing complications (39.1%), the last referring to false test results, medical complications, or unnecessary treatments. Men eligible for prostate-specific antigen screening were more likely than women eligible for mammography to express concerns about testing complications and to prioritize weighing pros and cons over gut feelings (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Although this sample was predisposed to screening, most patients wanted help in finalizing their decision. Many wanted to weigh the pros and cons and expressed fears of potential harms from screening. Understanding how patients approach decisions may help design more effective engagement strategies.

Navicular Stress Fracture Outcomes in Athletes: Analysis of 62 Injuries.

The optimal treatment modalities for navicular stress fractures in athletes is currently unknown for this season-ending injury. The present study evaluated factors that might be significant and affect healing outcomes, specifically focusing on the return to activity (RTA) time and a decreased desired activity (DDA) after treatment in athletes. Such considerations included previous navicular stress fractures, patient demographic data and type of sport, and initiation time of treatment. The data from 59 patients with 62 fractures were prospectively analyzed from May 2005 through July 2016. The results showed a significant correlation between a previous navicular stress fracture and decreased desired activity. The average duration of symptoms before receiving definitive treatment was 8.8 months. Computed tomography as the initial imaging modality correlated positively with a correct diagnosis (1.00). In contrast, magnetic resonance imaging, when used initially, was only 71% accurate. Runners constituted most of the cohort at 38 (61.3%). Ten other athletes were involved in jumping sports. Of the 62 injuries, 21 (33.9%) were in elite or professional athletes, all of whom were able to RTA, with 1 patient, a 38-year-old world record holding runner, having a DDA. Seven refractures (11.2%) occurred an average >5 years after the initial injury, predominantly in those aged <21 years, none with previous surgery. Eight patients (12.9%) developed postinjury arthrosis, including 1 with DDA. Patients who underwent open reduction and internal fixation had a RTA of 4.56 months compared with those who had undergone nonoperative treatment, who had an average RTA of 3.97 months. Seven patients (11.2%) underwent screw removal and required a longer RTA. Overall, of the 62 injuries, the patients with 57 of the injuries (91.9%) were able to RTA at their preinjury level.

Predicting prostate cancer treatment choices: The role of numeracy, time discounting, and risk attitudes.

Prostate cancer is the most common cancer among males in the United States, and there is lack of consensus as to whether active surveillance or radical prostatectomy is the best course of treatment. In this study, we examined the role of numeracy, time discounting, and risk taking on decision-making about prostate cancer treatment-in 279 men over age 50 without a prior prostate cancer diagnosis. Results showed that active surveillance was the most chosen option and its preference was predicted by numeracy and time discounting. However, radical prostatectomy was significantly predicted by participants' propensity to take risks.

Mapping the Decision-Making Process for Adjuvant Endocrine Therapy for Breast Cancer: The Role of Decisional Resolve.

BACKGROUND: Studies show adjuvant endocrine therapy increases survival and decreases risk of breast cancer recurrence for hormone receptor-positive tumors. Yet studies also suggest that adherence rates among women taking this therapy may be as low as 50% owing largely to adverse side effects. Despite these rates, research on longitudinal patient decision making regarding this therapy is scant. OBJECTIVE: We sought to map the decision-making process for women considering and initiating adjuvant endocrine therapy, paying particular attention to patterns of uncertainty and decisional change over time. METHODS: A longitudinal series of semistructured interviews conducted at a multispecialty health care organization in Northern California with 35 newly diagnosed patients eligible for adjuvant endocrine therapy were analyzed. Analysis led to the identification and indexing of 3 new decision-making constructs-decisional phase, decisional direction, and decisional resolve-which were then organized using a visual matrix and examined for patterns characterizing the decision-making process. RESULTS: Our data reveal that most patients do not make a single, discrete decision to take or not take hormone therapy but rather traverse multiple decisional states, characterized by 1) phase, 2) direction, and 3) strength of resolve. Our analysis tracks these decisional states longitudinally using a grayscale-coded matrix. Our data show that decisional resolve wavers not just when considering therapy, as the existing concept of decisional conflict suggests, but even after initiating it, which may signal future decisions to forgo therapy. CONCLUSIONS: Adjuvant endocrine therapy, like other chronic care decisions, has a longer decision-making process and implementation period. Thus, theoretical, empirical, and clinical approaches should consider further exploring the new concept and measurement of decisional resolve, as it may help to improve subsequent medication adherence.

Who and when should we screen for prostate cancer? Interviews with key opinion leaders.

Prostate cancer screening using prostate-specific antigen (PSA) is highly controversial. In this Q & A, Guest Editors for BMC Medicine's 'Spotlight on Prostate Cancer' article collection, Sigrid Carlsson and Andrew Vickers, invite some of the world's key opinion leaders to discuss who, and when, to screen for prostate cancer. In response to the points of view from the invited experts, the Guest Editors summarize the experts' views and give their own personal opinions on PSA screening.

In Absentia: An Exploratory Study of How Patients Are Considered in Multidisciplinary Cancer Team Meetings.

BACKGROUND: Multidisciplinary team meetings and shared decision-making are potential means of delivering patient-centred care. Not much is known about how those two paradigms fit together in cancer care. This study aimed to investigate how decisions are made in multidisciplinary team meetings and whether patient perspectives are incorporated in these decisions. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A qualitative study was conducted using non-participant observation at multidisciplinary team meetings (also called tumor boards) at the University Cancer Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Germany. Two researchers recorded structured field notes from a total of N = 15 multidisciplinary team meetings. Data were analyzed using content analysis and descriptive statistics. RESULTS: Physicians mainly exchanged medical information and based their decision-making on this information. Individual patient characteristics or their treatment preferences were rarely considered or discussed. In the few cases where patient preferences were raised as a topic, this information did not seem to be taken into account in decision-making processes about treatment recommendations. CONCLUSION: The processes in multidisciplinary team meetings we observed did not exhibit shared decision-making. Patient perspectives were absent. If multidisciplinary team meetings wish to become more patient-centred they will have to modify their processes and find a way to include patient preferences into the decision-making process.

A Randomized Controlled Effectiveness Trial for PSA Screening Decision Support Interventions in Two Primary Care Settings.

BACKGROUND: Decision support interventions (DESIs) provide a mechanism to translate comparative effectiveness research results into clinical care so that patients are able to make informed decisions. Patient decision support interventions for prostate-specific antigen (PSA) have been shown to promote informed decision making and reduce PSA testing in efficacy trials, but their impact in real world settings is not clear. OBJECTIVE: We performed an effectiveness trial of PSA decision support interventions in primary care. DESIGN: A randomized controlled trial of three distribution strategies was compared to a control. PARTICIPANTS: Participants included 2,550 men eligible for PSA testing (76.6 % of the eligible population) and 2001 survey respondents (60.1 % survey response rate). INTERVENTIONS: The intervention groups were: 1) mailed the DESI in DVD format, 2) offered a shared medical appointment (SMA) to view the DESI with other men and discuss, and 3) both options. MAIN MEASURES: We measured PSA testing identified via electronic medical record at 12 months and DESI use by self-report 4 months after the intervention mailing. KEY RESULTS: We found no differences in PSA testing across the three distribution strategies over a year-long follow-up period: 21 %, 24 %, 22 % in the DESI, SMA, and combined group respectively, compared to 21 % in the control group (p = 0.51). Self-reported DESI use was low across all strategies at 4 months: 16 % in the mailed DESI group, 6 % in the SMA group, and 15 % in the combined group (p = < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Mailing PSA decision support interventions or inviting men to shared medical appointments unrelated to a primary care office visit do not appear to promote informed decision making, or change PSA testing behavior.

An exploratory mixed-methods crossover study comparing DVD- vs. Web-based patient decision support in three conditions: The importance of patient perspectives.

BACKGROUND: The last 15 years have witnessed considerable progress in the development of decision support interventions (DESIs). However, fundamental questions about design and format of delivery remain. METHODS: An exploratory, randomized mixed-method crossover study was conducted to compare a DVD- and Web-based DESI. Randomized participants used either the Web or the DVD first, followed by the alternative format. Participants completed a questionnaire to assess decision-specific knowledge at baseline and a questionnaire and structured qualitative interview after viewing each format. Tracking software was used to capture Web utilization. Transcripts were analyzed using integrated inductive and deductive approaches. Quantitative data were analyzed using exploratory bivariate and multivariate analyses. RESULTS: Exploratory knowledge analyses suggest that both formats increased knowledge, with limited evidence that the DVD increased knowledge more than the Web. Format preference varied across participants: 44% preferred the Web, 32% preferred the DVD and 24% preferred 'both'. Patient discussions of preferences for DESI information structure and the importance of a patients' stage of a given decision suggest these characteristics may be important factors underlying variation in utilization, format preferences and knowledge outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that both DESI formats effectively increase knowledge. Patients' perceptions of these two formats further suggest that there may be no single 'best' format for all patients. These results have important implications for understanding why different DESI formats might be preferable to and more effective for different patients. Further research is needed to explore the relationship between these factors and DESI utilization outcomes across diverse patient populations.

Redefining Risk and Benefit: Understanding the Decision to Undergo Contralateral Prophylactic Mastectomy.

Rates of contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) among unilateral breast cancer patients are rapidly increasing; however, there are little data documenting the decision-making process of patients with no known BRCA mutations, who elect this more aggressive treatment. We conducted semistructured interviews with nine newly diagnosed patients who elected CPM over other surgical options. Using grounded theory, we analyzed interview data to identify influential decision-making factors by prevalence and intensity across participants. Decision-making factors included subjective evaluations of risk and benefit, avoidance of future breast cancer surveillance and accompanying worry, and desire to maintain (or improve) breast appearance. Based solely on survival benefit, the decision to undergo CPM might be viewed as unnecessary or even misguided. However, our findings show the importance of psychosocial factors in patients' assessments of risk and benefit, and support the need for additional patient-provider communication regarding these factors.

Clinicians' perceptions of digital vs. paper-based decision support interventions.

RATIONALE, AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Despite extensive evidence on the value of patient decision support interventions (DESIs), there is no consensus on optimal DESI formats. Assessing clinicians' perceptions about DESI formats can help facilitate their adoption. The aim of this study was to assess clinicians' perceptions of DESIs formats and potential use in practice. METHODS: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with doctors from diverse practice areas (internal medicine, OB/GYN, surgery, medical oncology, emergency medicine) and elicited perceptions toward patient DESIs formats (digital vs. paper) and timing of administration. Questions also elicited beliefs underlying attitudes, perceived social norms and self-efficacy for using DESIs and the feasibility of doing so. Data analysis was conducted using a thematic analysis approach. RESULTS: Participants identified strengths of both more comprehensive digital and shorter paper-based tools and thought they could complement each other. Participants consistently expressed the advantages of using DESIs outside the consultation to supplement clinical discussions about cancer decisions given the amount of information to discuss during these emotion-laden conversations. Participants felt that patients with older age and lower socio-economic status were more likely to use a paper-based compared with a digital DESI. Participants also noted challenges related to reliable resources such as computers and Internet in the practice setting, which would be necessary for implementing the digital DESIs on site. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians' perceptions and opinions about value of DESIs can vary widely across doctor, patient and clinic characteristics. A one-size-fits-all approach to implementation might not be feasible, suggesting that flexible approaches to providing decision support for patients are needed to drive broader adoption.

Physicians' perceptions of shared decision-making behaviours: a qualitative study demonstrating the continued chasm between aspirations and clinical practice.

BACKGROUND: Shared Decision Making (SDM) is a process of engaging patients in health decisions that involve multiple medically appropriate treatment options. Despite growing public and policy support for patient engagement in health decisions, SDM is not widely practiced in clinical settings. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of our study was to explore clinicians' attitudes, beliefs and perceived social norms about engaging in SDM behaviours. DESIGN: Semi-structured qualitative interviews were conducted with physicians in five practice areas. SETTING AND PARTICIPANTS: This study was conducted at an academic medical centre in St. Louis, MO. The final sample included 20 physicians: five surgeons, five OB/GYNs, four medical oncologists, five internists and one emergency medicine physician. RESULTS: Clinicians described a number of beliefs and cultural- and system-level obstacles to the widespread implementation of SDM, such as how to engage in discussions of cost, uncertainty and clinical equipoise and how to engage patients across various socioeconomic backgrounds. CONCLUSION: Although a large number of participants expressed general support for incorporating SDM into practice, most held fundamentally inconsistent beliefs about practicing specific SDM behaviours. More extensive training of physicians at all levels (pre- and post-licensure) can help increase clinicians' confidence in SDM skills. Developing methods of integrating SDM into the institutional framework of hospitals and training programmes could also increase clinicians' motivation to practice SDM and work to change the culture of medicine such that SDM behaviours are supported.

Beyond barriers: fundamental 'disconnects' underlying the treatment of breast cancer patients' sexual health.

Sexual health concerns represent one of the most frequently experienced and longest-lasting effects of breast cancer treatment, but research suggests that service providers rarely discuss sexual health with their patients. Existing research examining barriers to addressing patients' sexual health concerns has focused on discrete characteristics of the provider-patient interaction without considering the broader context in which these interactions occur. Drawing on the experiences of 21 breast cancer survivors, this paper explores three ways in which fundamental cultural and structural characteristics of the cancer care system in the USA may prevent breast cancer survivors from addressing their sexual health concerns, including: (1) when patients discussed sexual health with their providers, their providers approached sexuality as primarily physical, while participants experienced complex, multidimensional sexual health concerns; (2) specialisation within cancer care services made it difficult for patients to identify the appropriate provider to address their concerns; and (3) the structure of cancer care literally disconnects patients from the healthcare system at the time when sexual side effects commonly emerged. These data suggest that addressing breast cancer survivors' sexual health concerns requires a multifaceted approach to health systems change.