A qualitative evaluation of factors influencing Tumor Treating fields (TTFields) therapy decision making among brain tumor patients and physicians.

BACKGROUND: Tumor Treating Fields (TTFields) Therapy is an FDA-approved therapy in the first line and recurrent setting for glioblastoma. Despite Phase 3 evidence showing improved survival with TTFields, it is not uniformly utilized. We aimed to examine patient and clinician views of TTFields and factors shaping utilization of TTFields through a unique research partnership with medical neuro oncology and medical social sciences. METHODS: Adult glioblastoma patients who were offered TTFields at a tertiary care academic hospital were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about their decision to use or not use TTFields. Clinicians who prescribe TTFields were invited to participate in a semi-structured interview about TTFields. RESULTS: Interviews were completed with 40 patients with a mean age of 53 years; 92.5% were white and 60% were male. Participants who decided against TTFields stated that head shaving, appearing sick, and inconvenience of wearing/carrying the device most influenced their decision. The most influential factors for use of TTFields were the efficacy of the device and their clinician's opinion. Clinicians (N = 9) stated that TTFields was a good option for glioblastoma patients, but some noted that their patients should consider the burdens and benefits of TTFields as it may not be the desired choice for all patients. CONCLUSIONS: This is the first study to examine patient decision making for TTFields. Findings suggest that clinician support and efficacy data are among the key decision-making factors. Properly understanding the path to patients' decision making is crucial in optimizing the use of TTFields and other therapeutic decisions for glioblastoma patients.

Surgical appropriateness nudges: Developing behavioral science nudges to integrate appropriateness criteria into the decision making of spine surgeons.

BACKGROUND: Substantial variation exists in surgeon decision making. In response, multiple specialty societies have established criteria for the appropriate use of spine surgery. Yet few strategies exist to facilitate routine use of appropriateness criteria by surgeons. Behavioral science nudges are increasingly used to enhance decision making by clinicians. We sought to design "surgical appropriateness nudges" to support routine use of appropriateness criteria for degenerative lumbar scoliosis and spondylolisthesis. METHODS: The work reflected Stage I of the NIH Stage Model for Behavioral Intervention Development and involved an iterative, multi-method approach, emphasizing qualitative methods. Study sites included two large referral centers for spine surgery. We recruited spine surgeons from both sites for two rounds of focus groups. To produce preliminary nudge prototypes, we examined sources of variation in surgeon decision making (Focus Group 1) and synthesized existing knowledge of appropriateness criteria, behavioral science nudge frameworks, electronic tools, and the surgical workflow. We refined nudge prototypes via feedback from content experts, site leaders, and spine surgeons (Focus Group 2). Concurrently, we collected data on surgical practices and outcomes at study sites. We pilot tested the refined nudge prototypes among spine surgeons, and surveyed them about nudge applicability, acceptability, and feasibility (scale 1-5, 5 = strongly agree). RESULTS: Fifteen surgeons participated in focus groups, giving substantive input and feedback on nudge design. Refined nudge prototypes included: individualized surgeon score cards (frameworks: descriptive social norms/peer comparison/feedback), online calculators embedded in the EHR (decision aid/mapping), a multispecialty case conference (injunctive norms/social influence), and a preoperative check (reminders/ salience of information/ accountable justification). Two nudges (score cards, preop checks) incorporated data on surgeon practices and outcomes. Six surgeons pilot tested the refined nudges, and five completed the survey (83%). The overall mean score was 4.0 (standard deviation [SD] 0.5), with scores of 3.9 (SD 0.5) for applicability, 4.1 (SD 0.5) for acceptability, and 4.0 (SD 0.5), for feasibility. Conferences had the highest scores 4.3 (SD 0.6) and calculators the lowest 3.9 (SD 0.4). CONCLUSIONS: Behavioral science nudges might be a promising strategy for facilitating incorporation of appropriateness criteria into the surgical workflow of spine surgeons. Future stages in intervention development will test whether these surgical appropriateness nudges can be implemented in practice and influence surgical decision making.

Women's Knowledge of Genomic Testing and Precision Medicine in Breast Cancer Treatment Decision-Making.

PURPOSE: To understand awareness of genetic and genomic testing, as well as decision-making, in women diagnosed with breast cancer. PARTICIPANTS & SETTING: 29 African American/Black and Latina/Hispanic women diagnosed with breast cancer. METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: A semistructured interview guide was used in focus groups conducted via videoconference. Transcripts were analyzed using thematic analysis. FINDINGS: Many of the women understood the concept of genetic testing to identify the BRCA1/BRCA2 variant, but none of them were aware of genomic testing and its implications for personalized medicine. Participants discussed provider and patient roles in treatment decision-making, identifying roles that the physician might play in treatment planning, from primary decision-maker to collaborator. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: As the number of precision cancer treatments expands, patients must be able to comprehend the information provided to make informed decisions about their treatment. Providers should do a better job of explaining potential treatments so that patients feel they are part of the decision-making process. Addressing gaps in treatment access and uptake requires providers to prioritize patient engagement and understanding.

Perception of pregnant individuals, health providers and decision makers on interventions to cease substance consumption during pregnancy: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Despite multiple recommendations and strategies implemented at a national and international level, cigarette smoking, alcohol consumption, and cannabis use during pregnancy remains high in most countries. The objective of this study was to examine key stakeholders' perception of the treatment interventions adopted in Spain, to identify political, organizational and personal factors associated with successful implementation, and to propose strategies for improvement. METHODS: A qualitative study with a phenomenological approach was conducted in 2022. The target groups were: (1) clinical decision makers in the field of addiction science, (2) health professionals who carry out treatment interventions, and (3) pregnant individuals who use tobacco, alcohol or cannabis. Two focus groups and eight in-depth interviews were conducted, recorded, and transcribed. Exploratory analysis and inductive open coding was performed, codes were merged into categories, and subcategories were identified. RESULTS: The analysis resulted in 10 subcategories which were further merged into three main categories: (1) Degree of adoption and utility of treatment interventions implemented; (2) Needs and demands with respect to the organization of treatment interventions; and, (3) Personal barriers to and facilitators for treatment. Respondents reported that despite multiple national and regional cessation initiatives, treatment interventions were rarely adopted in clinical practice. Health care administrators demanded reliable records to quantify substance use for better planning of activities. Health care professionals advocated for additional time and training and both echoed the importance of integrating cessation interventions into routine prenatal care and creating in-house specialized units. The difficulty in quitting, lack of awareness of risk for foetus and child and the controversial advice were identified as barriers by pregnant individuals. CONCLUSIONS: Consistent with previous work, this study found that cessation strategies implemented by the health authorities are not effective if they are not accompanied by organizational and behavioral changes. The current study identifies a set of factors that could be pivotal in ensuring the success of treatment interventions targeting tobacco, alcohol and cannabis use among pregnant individuals.

Behaviour, barriers and facilitators of shared decision making in breast cancer surgical treatment: A qualitative systematic review using a 'Best Fit' framework approach.

BACKGROUND: Due to the diversity and high sensitivity of the treatment, there were difficulties and uncertainties in the breast cancer surgical decision-making process. We aimed to describe the patient's decision-making behaviour and shared decision-making (SDM)-related barriers and facilitators in breast cancer surgical treatment. METHODS: We searched eight databases for qualitative studies and mixed-method studies about breast cancer patients' surgical decision-making process from inception to March 2021. The quality of the studies was critically appraised by two researchers independently. We used a 'best fit framework approach' to analyze and synthesize the evidence. RESULTS: Twenty-eight qualitative studies and three mixed-method studies were included in this study. Four themes and 10 subthemes were extracted: (a) struggling with various considerations, (b) actual decision-making behaviours, (c) SDM not routinely implemented and (d) multiple facilitators and barriers to SDM. CONCLUSIONS: Patients had various considerations of breast surgery and SDM was not routinely implemented. There was a discrepancy between information exchange behaviours, value clarification, decision support utilization and SDM due to cognitive and behavioural biases. When individuals made surgical decisions, their behaviours were affected by individual-level and system-level factors. Therefore, healthcare providers and other stakeholders should constantly improve communication skills and collaboration, and emphasize the importance of decision support, so as to embed SDM into routine practice. PATIENT AND PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This systematic review was conducted as part of a wider research entitled: Breast cancer patients' actual participation roles in surgical decision making: a mixed method research. The results of this project helped us to better analyze and generalize patients' views.

Decision Making in Nasal Reconstruction: When to Use the Forehead Flap?

In this review, the paramedian forehead flap indications and uses are reviewed, specifically examining clinical situations where patient selection is important. In these settings, a preoperative discussion with a patient regarding surgical expectations and goals in the setting of their defect is paramount. The authors review the literature regarding the psychosocial aspects of major nasal reconstruction and review preoperative discussion points that are key to a well-informed patient and improved patient satisfaction through the nasal reconstructive process.

A Provider-Facing Decision Support Tool for Prostate Cancer Screening in Primary Care: A Pilot Study.

OBJECTIVES: Our objective was to pilot test an electronic health record-embedded decision support tool to facilitate prostate-specific antigen (PSA) screening discussions in the primary care setting. METHODS: We pilot-tested a novel decision support tool that was used by 10 primary care physicians (PCPs) for 6 months, followed by a survey. The tool comprised (1) a risk-stratified algorithm, (2) a tool for facilitating shared decision-making (Simple Schema), (3) three best practice advisories (BPAs: <45, 45-75, and >75 years), and (4) a health maintenance module for scheduling automated reminders about PSA rescreening. RESULTS: All PCPs found the tool feasible, acceptable, and clear to use. Eight out of ten PCPs reported that the tool made PSA screening conversations somewhat or much easier. Before using the tool, 70% of PCPs felt confident in their ability to discuss PSA screening with their patient, and this improved to 100% after the tool was used by PCPs for 6 months. PCPs found the BPAs for eligible (45-75 years) and older men (>75 years) more useful than the BPA for younger men (<45 years). Among the 10 PCPs, 60% found the Simple Schema to be very useful, and 50% found the health maintenance module to be extremely or very useful. Most PCPs reported the components of the tool to be at least somewhat useful, with 10% finding them to be very burdensome. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated the feasibility and acceptability of the tool, which is notable given the marked low acceptance of existing tools. All PCPs reported that they would consider continuing to use the tool in their clinic and were likely or very likely to recommend the tool to a colleague.

Patients' experiences with shared decision-making in home-based palliative care - navigation through major life decisions.

BACKGROUND: This study addresses the issue of shared decision-making (SDM) in a Norwegian home-based palliative care setting. The significance of patient involvement in SDM is widely acknowledged, and many patients want to participate in decisions about care and treatment. Yet, it remains a need for more knowledge regarding the initiators and approaches of SDM in the context of home-based palliative care, particularly from the patients' perspective. The aim of this study is to understand patients' experiences and preferences for SDM in home-based palliative care, seeking to enhance the quality of care and direct the planning of healthcare services. METHODS: We used a qualitative explorative design. A hermeneutic approach was employed, and data was collected through in-dept interviews with 13 patients. RESULTS: The study uncovered an overarching theme of "Navigating to reach own decisions," comprising three sub-themes: "To be trapped in life without decisions to act on"; "To surrender to others and let others deal with decisions"; "To continue to be oneself without focusing on disease and decision-making". CONCLUSIONS: The findings underscore the need for flexible, person-centered approaches in SDM, tailored to the fluctuating health literacy and changing preferences of patients in palliative care settings. Our study contributes to the understanding of SDM in palliative care by highlighting how patients navigate the balance between autonomy and reliance on HCPs. Future research should explore how healthcare systems, including HCPs' roles in the system, can adapt to the patients' dynamic needs, to ensuring that SDM will remain a supportive and empowering process for patients at all stages of their disease.

Modified frailty index predicts postoperative morbidity in adhesive small bowel obstruction: analyzing the National Inpatient Sample 2015-2019.

BACKGROUND: There are limited data identifying predictors of postoperative outcomes in adhesive small bowel obstruction (ASBO). This study used the National Inpatient Sample (NIS) to assess the efficacy of the modified frailty index (mFI) to predict postoperative morbidity among patients undergoing an operation for ASBO. METHODS: A retrospective analysis of the NIS between September 1, 2015, and December 31, 2019, was performed to identify adult patients who underwent nonelective operative intervention for ASBO. The mFI was used to stratify patients as either frail (mFI value ≥ 0.27) or robust (mFI value < 0.27). The primary outcomes were overall in-hospital postoperative morbidity and mortality. The secondary outcomes were system-specific morbidity, length of stay (LOS), total in-hospital healthcare cost, and discharge disposition. Univariable and multivariable regressions were used. RESULTS: Overall, 23251 robust patients and 6122 frail patients were included. Adjusted analyses demonstrated that frail patients had increased in-hospital mortality (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 2.16; 95% CI, 1.80-2.60), postoperative morbidity (aOR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.52-1.74), postoperative LOS (adjusted mean difference [aMD], 0.97 days; 95% CI, 0.73-1.21), and total in-hospital healthcare costs (aMD, $18,921; 95% CI, $14,608-$23,235) and were less likely to be discharged home (aOR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.55-0.63). The findings were unchanged on subgroup analysis of patients undergoing open operation and those older than 65 years of age. CONCLUSION: The mFI may predict postoperative outcomes for ASBO. Stratifying patients based on frailty may assist clinicians and patients in making informed decisions, setting realistic expectations, and proactively planning postoperative disposition.

[Application Progress of Shared Decision Making Model in Patients
with Thoracic Cancer].

As a new diagnosis and treatment decision-making model, shared decision making (SDM) can effectively solve the problem of patient compliance in the diagnosis and treatment of thoracic tumors, balance the status of both doctors and patients, and gradually get attention and application in the clinical practice of thoracic surgery. The application of SDM in the diagnosis and treatment of thoracic tumors is conducive to improve doctors' diagnosis and treatment level and alleviating the pressure of responsibility, reduce patients' psychological pressure and improve patients' compliance and also improve medical trust and reduce doctor-patient conflict. Due to the limited medical literacy and autonomy of patients, the time for diagnosis and treatment is short due to the imbalance of doctor-patient ratio. Meanwhile, due to the limited sample size of existing studies, SDM model cannot be proved to have a clear gain for the treatment of thoracic tumors, and the implementation of SDM model still faces resistance. In the future, the development of auxiliary decision-making system and the improvement of doctors' humanistic care ability will be conducive to promote the practical application of SDM model in thoracic surgery.
.

Impact of timing and format of patient decision aids for breast cancer patients on their involvement in and preparedness for decision making - the IMPACTT randomised controlled trial protocol.

BACKGROUND: After curative surgery for early-stage breast cancer, patients face a decision on whether to undergo surgery alone or to receive one or more adjuvant treatments, which may lower the risk of recurrence. Variations in survival outcomes are often marginal but there are differences in the side effects and other features of the options that patients may value differently. Hence, the patient's values and preferences are critical in determining what option to choose. It is well-researched that the use of shared decision making and patient decision aids can support this choice in a discussion between patient and clinician. However, it is still to be investigated what impact the timing and format of the patient decision aid have on shared decision making outcomes. In this trial, we aim to investigate the impact of a digital pre-consult compared to a paper-based in-consult patient decision aid on patients' involvement in shared decision making, decisional conflict and preparedness to make a decision. METHODS: The study is a randomised controlled trial with 204 patients at two Danish oncology outpatient clinics. Eligible patients are newly diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer and offered adjuvant treatments after curative surgery to lower the risk of recurrence. Participants will be randomised to receive either an in-consult paper-based patient decision aid or a pre-consult digital patient decision aid. Data collection includes patient and clinician-reported outcomes as well as observer-reported shared decision making based on audio recordings of the consultation. The primary outcome is the extent to which patients are engaged in a shared decision making process reported by the patient. Secondary aims include the length of consultation, preparation for decision making, preferred role in shared decision making and decisional conflict. DISCUSSION: This study is the first known randomised, controlled trial comparing a digital, pre-consult patient decision aid to an identical paper-based, in-consult patient decision aid. It will contribute evidence on the impact of patient decision aids in terms of investigating if pre-consult digital patient decisions aids compared to in-consult paper-based decision aids support the cancer patients in being better prepared for decision making. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT05573022).

Incorporating PHI in decision making: external validation of the Rotterdam risk calculators for detection of prostate cancer.

PURPOSE: External validation of existing risk calculators (RC) to assess the individualized risk of detecting prostate cancer (PCa) in prostate biopsies is needed to determine their clinical usefulness. The objective was to externally validate the Rotterdam Prostate Cancer RCs 3 and 4 (RPCRC-3/4) and that incorporating PHI (RPCRC-PHI) in a contemporary Spanish cohort. METHODS: Multicenter prospective study that included patients suspicious of harboring PCa. Men who attended the urology consultation were tested for PHI before prostate biopsy. To evaluate the performance of the prediction models: discrimination (receiver operating characteristic (ROC) curves), calibration and net benefit [decision curve analysis (DCA)] were calculated. These analyses were carried out for detection of any PCa and clinically significant (cs)PCa, defined as ISUP grade ≥ 2. RESULTS: Among the 559 men included, 337 (60.28%) and 194 (34.7%) were diagnosed of PCa and csPCa, respectively. RPCRC-PHI had the best discrimination ability for detection of PCa and csPCa with AUCs of 0.85 (95%CI 0.82-0.88) and 0.82 (95%CI 0.78-0.85), respectively. Calibration plots showed that RPCRC-3/4 underestimates the risk of detecting PCa showing the need for recalibration. In DCA, RPCRC-PHI shows the highest net benefit compared to biopsy all men. CONCLUSIONS: The RPCRC-PHI performed properly in a contemporary clinical setting, especially for prediction of csPCa.

Decision making of iatrogenic coronary embolism after SAVR: a case report.

BACKGROUND: Acute coronary artery obstruction is a rare but lethal complication of surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR), which may be caused by embolization of resected native tissue such as calcium plaque, thrombus, or perivalvular aortic tissue like fat embolus. Coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) and percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) are the main treatment modalities. PCI is less invasive, but it is difficult to determine its feasibility intraoperatively. CASE PRESENTATION: We report an 86-year-old woman who had asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis. She had scleroderma with an intractable left leg ulcer and bilateral leg varices. Considering the possibility of the spread of infection from the leg wound, SAVR was performed via right anterior thoracotomy to avoid complications such as mediastinitis. Coronary artery occlusion was suspected after weaning of cardiopulmonary bypass in the operation room due to asynergy with ST elevation and new severe mitral regurgitation. Transoesophageal echocardiography (TEE) helped diagnose coronary obstruction by embolus based on the degree of stenosis and the movement of the stenosis site. Percutaneous catheter intervention was performed successfully to restore coronary perfusion. CONCLUSION: TEE facilitated the diagnosis of coronary artery stenosis caused by an embolus and helped in determining the feasibility of percutaneous catheter intervention, thus allowing us to choose PCI over CABG as a less invasive surgery. This is especially invaluable in cases where obtaining a saphenous graft for CABG is difficult or where CABG would have required conversion from minimally invasive surgery (anterolateral approach) to median sternotomy.

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.

Uncertainty tolerance among primary care physicians: Relationship to shared decision making-related perceptions, practices, and physician characteristics.

OBJECTIVE: Understand how physicians' uncertainty tolerance (UT) in clinical care relates to their personal characteristics, perceptions and practices regarding shared decision making (SDM). METHODS: As part of a trial of SDM training about colorectal cancer screening, primary care physicians (n = 67) completed measures of their uncertainty tolerance in medical practice (Anxiety subscale of the Physician's Reactions to Uncertainty Scale, PRUS-A), and their SDM self-efficacy (confidence in SDM skills). Patients (N = 466) completed measures of SDM (SDM Process scale) after a clinical visit. Bivariate regression analyses and multilevel regression analyses examined relationships. RESULTS: Higher UT was associated with greater physician age (p = .01) and years in practice (p = 0.015), but not sex or race. Higher UT was associated with greater SDM self-efficacy (p < 0.001), but not patient-reported SDM. CONCLUSION: Greater age and practice experience predict greater physician UT, suggesting that UT might be improved through training, while UT is associated with greater confidence in SDM, suggesting that improving UT might improve SDM. However, UT was unassociated with patient-reported SDM, raising the need for further studies of these relationships. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Developing and implementing training interventions aimed at increasing physician UT may be a promising way to promote SDM in clinical care.

Decision regret of cancer patients after radiotherapy: results from a cross-sectional observational study at a large tertiary cancer center in Germany.

PURPOSE: The decision-making process regarding cancer treatment is emotionally challenging for patients and families, harboring the risk of decision regret. We aimed to explore prevalence and determinants of decision regret following radiotherapy. METHODS: This cross-sectional observational study was conducted at a tertiary cancer center to assess decision regret following radiotherapy. The study employed the German version of the Ottawa Decision Regret Scale (DRS) which was validated in the study population. Decision regret was categorized as absent (0 points), mild (1-25 points), and strong (> 25 points). Various psychosocial outcome measures were collected using validated questionnaires to identify factors that may be associated with decision regret. RESULTS: Out of 320 eligible patients, 212 participated, with 207 completing the DRS. Median age at start of radiotherapy was 64 years [interquartile range (IQR), 56-72], genders were balanced (105 female, 102 male), and the most common cancer types were breast (n = 84; 41%), prostate (n = 57; 28%), and head-and-neck cancer (n = 19; 9%). Radiotherapy was applied with curative intention in 188 patients (91%). Median time between last radiotherapy fraction and questionnaire completion was 23 months (IQR, 1-38). DRS comprehensibility was rated as good or very good by 98% (196 of 201) of patients. Decision regret was reported by 43% (n = 90) as absent, 38% (n = 78) as mild, and 18% (n = 38) as strong. In the multiple regression analysis, poor Eastern Cooperative Oncology Group performance status, low social support, and dissatisfaction with care were independent risk factors for higher decision regret after radiotherapy. CONCLUSIONS: The German version of the DRS could be used to assess decision regret in a diverse cohort of cancer patients undergoing radiotherapy. Decision regret was prevalent in a considerable proportion of patients. Further studies are necessary to validate these findings and obtain causal factors associated with decision regret after radiotherapy.