Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions.

BACKGROUND: Patient decision aids are interventions designed to support people making health decisions. At a minimum, patient decision aids make the decision explicit, provide evidence-based information about the options and associated benefits/harms, and help clarify personal values for features of options. This is an update of a Cochrane review that was first published in 2003 and last updated in 2017. OBJECTIVES: To assess the effects of patient decision aids in adults considering treatment or screening decisions using an integrated knowledge translation approach. SEARCH METHODS: We conducted the updated search for the period of 2015 (last search date) to March 2022 in CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, EBSCO, and grey literature. The cumulative search covers database origins to March 2022. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included published randomized controlled trials comparing patient decision aids to usual care. Usual care was defined as general information, risk assessment, clinical practice guideline summaries for health consumers, placebo intervention (e.g. information on another topic), or no intervention. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently screened citations for inclusion, extracted intervention and outcome data, and assessed risk of bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Primary outcomes, based on the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS), were attributes related to the choice made (informed values-based choice congruence) and the decision-making process, such as knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, feeling informed, clear values, participation in decision-making, and adverse events. Secondary outcomes were choice, confidence in decision-making, adherence to the chosen option, preference-linked health outcomes, and impact on the healthcare system (e.g. consultation length). We pooled results using mean differences (MDs) and risk ratios (RRs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs), applying a random-effects model. We conducted a subgroup analysis of 105 studies that were included in the previous review version compared to those published since that update (n = 104 studies). We used Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) to assess the certainty of the evidence. MAIN RESULTS: This update added 104 new studies for a total of 209 studies involving 107,698 participants. The patient decision aids focused on 71 different decisions. The most common decisions were about cardiovascular treatments (n = 22 studies), cancer screening (n = 17 studies colorectal, 15 prostate, 12 breast), cancer treatments (e.g. 15 breast, 11 prostate), mental health treatments (n = 10 studies), and joint replacement surgery (n = 9 studies). When assessing risk of bias in the included studies, we rated two items as mostly unclear (selective reporting: 100 studies; blinding of participants/personnel: 161 studies), due to inadequate reporting. Of the 209 included studies, 34 had at least one item rated as high risk of bias. There was moderate-certainty evidence that patient decision aids probably increase the congruence between informed values and care choices compared to usual care (RR 1.75, 95% CI 1.44 to 2.13; 21 studies, 9377 participants). Regarding attributes related to the decision-making process and compared to usual care, there was high-certainty evidence that patient decision aids result in improved participants' knowledge (MD 11.90/100, 95% CI 10.60 to 13.19; 107 studies, 25,492 participants), accuracy of risk perceptions (RR 1.94, 95% CI 1.61 to 2.34; 25 studies, 7796 participants), and decreased decisional conflict related to feeling uninformed (MD -10.02, 95% CI -12.31 to -7.74; 58 studies, 12,104 participants), indecision about personal values (MD -7.86, 95% CI -9.69 to -6.02; 55 studies, 11,880 participants), and proportion of people who were passive in decision-making (clinician-controlled) (RR 0.72, 95% CI 0.59 to 0.88; 21 studies, 4348 participants). For adverse outcomes, there was high-certainty evidence that there was no difference in decision regret between the patient decision aid and usual care groups (MD -1.23, 95% CI -3.05 to 0.59; 22 studies, 3707 participants). Of note, there was no difference in the length of consultation when patient decision aids were used in preparation for the consultation (MD -2.97 minutes, 95% CI -7.84 to 1.90; 5 studies, 420 participants). When patient decision aids were used during the consultation with the clinician, the length of consultation was 1.5 minutes longer (MD 1.50 minutes, 95% CI 0.79 to 2.20; 8 studies, 2702 participants). We found the same direction of effect when we compared results for patient decision aid studies reported in the previous update compared to studies conducted since 2015. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Compared to usual care, across a wide variety of decisions, patient decision aids probably helped more adults reach informed values-congruent choices. They led to large increases in knowledge, accurate risk perceptions, and an active role in decision-making. Our updated review also found that patient decision aids increased patients' feeling informed and clear about their personal values. There was no difference in decision regret between people using decision aids versus those receiving usual care. Further studies are needed to assess the impact of patient decision aids on adherence and downstream effects on cost and resource use.

Decisional needs and interventions for young women considering contraceptive options: an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Although women face a wide range of contraceptive options, globally, young women are at risk of unintended pregnancies. Our umbrella review aimed to determine the decisional needs of nulligravida women aged 11 to 30 considering contraceptive options and identify effective interventions to support their involvement in making decisions about contraceptive use. METHODS: We followed Joanna Briggs Institute methods for umbrella reviews, theoretically guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. We searched six electronic databases. Two reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, and appraised quality using AMSTAR2. We analysed findings descriptively. RESULTS: Of 124 citations, we identified 11 reviews of variable quality (critically low to moderate quality): Six reported decisional needs and 5 reported on interventions. Decisional needs of young women were: (a) information needs about contraceptive options (e.g., mechanism of actions, eligibility, administration, side effects); (b) unclear values (concerns about hormone use) and features of different options (based on their religious values); and (c) need for support and resources (support from society and need for privacy). Compared to controls, decision support interventions including patient decision aids and patient education material increased knowledge and improved discussion of options with their clinicians. CONCLUSION: Young women making contraceptive decisions experience unmet decisional needs. Effective interventions such as patient decision aids and general patient education materials may address their decisional needs and enhance their level of participation in making contraception decisions. Implications and contribution to the field: Young women's decisional needs when considering contraceptive use are informational needs, unclear values (including religious influences), need for support and resources when facing this decision. Interventions, such as patient decision aid and patient education material can, address decisional needs by improving young women's knowledge about contraceptive options.

Management of urinary incontinence in females by primary care providers: a systematic review.

OBJECTIVE: To describe primary care provider (PCP) practices for the assessment and management of females with urinary incontinence (UI), and appraise these practices relative to recommendations made in high-quality clinical guidelines. METHODS: Studies were searched in four databases (MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, Web of Science) from their respective inception dates to 6 March 2023. All studies describing UI evaluation and management practices used by PCPs for female patients were eligible. Two reviewers independently selected studies assessed their quality and extracted data. A narrative synthesis of included studies was performed to describe practices. Relevant evaluation and management practices were then compared to recommendations that were consistent across current high-quality UI guidelines. Pharmacotherapy, referrals, and follow-ups were reported descriptively only. RESULTS: A total of 3475 articles were retrieved and, among those, 31 were included in the review. The majority reported a poor-moderate adherence to performing a pelvic examination (reported adherence range: 23-76%; based on eight studies), abdominal examination (0-87%; three studies), pelvic floor muscle assessment (9-36%; two studies), and bladder diary (0-92%; nine studies), while there was high adherence to urine analysis (40-97%; nine studies). For the conservative management of UI, studies revealed a poor-moderate adherence to recommendations for pelvic floor muscle training (5-82%; nine studies), bladder training (2-53%; eight studies) and lifestyle interventions (1-71%; six studies). Regarding pharmacotherapy, PCPs predominantly prescribed antimuscarinics (2-46%; nine studies) and oestrogen (2-77%; seven studies). Lastly, PCPs referred those reporting UI to medical specialists (5-37%; 14 studies). Referrals were generally made <30 days after diagnosis with urologists being the most sought out professional to assess and treat UI. CONCLUSION: This review revealed poor-moderate adherence to clinical practice guideline recommendations. While these findings reflect high variability in reporting, the key message is that most aspects of patient care for female UI provided by PCPs needs to improve.

Exploring appropriateness criteria for informing the total knee arthroplasty decision-making process: An interpretive descriptive study.

RATIONAL: The Hawker appropriateness criteria for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) are: osteoarthritis symptoms impacting quality of life, evidence of osteoarthritis, trial of conservative treatments, patient's realistic expectations, patient/surgeon agree benefits outweigh risks, and readiness for surgery. Little is known about the barriers and facilitators of using the Hawker et al. appropriateness criteria for TKA in clinical practice. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Explore the barriers and facilitators to using appropriateness criteria for TKA in making decisions for adults with knee osteoarthritis. METHODS: Interpretive descriptive qualitative study at an academic hospital. Purposive sampling aimed to recruit: (1) healthcare team members at all levels influencing care delivery, and (2) adults with TKA assessed at the hospital clinic. Semi-structured interviews asked about the barriers/facilitators to using the Hawker appropriateness criteria. Data analysis consisted of inductive thematic analysis with themes mapped to the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research domains. RESULTS: Nine healthcare professionals and 14 adults with TKA participated and identified common barriers to using the Hawker appropriateness criteria: (a) intervention characteristics domain: difficulty to assess criteria, patients expecting healthcare professionals to decide, limited accessibility to conservative treatments; (b) individuals characteristics domain: no need to change current TKA process, clinical judgement limited to OA severity/age, implicit assessment of subjective criteria; (c) inner setting domain: TKA information received after decision made; and (d) outer setting domain: no timely access to TKA. A facilitator of use was evidence/buy-in fosters programme changes. CONCLUSION: Barriers to using the criteria relevant to clinical practice and the healthcare system were identified while only one facilitator was revealed. Interventions tailored to these barriers are needed to support the use of the Hawker appropriateness criteria in TKA decision-making.

Appraising publicly available online resources to support patients considering decisions about medical assistance in dying in Canada: an environmental scan.

BACKGROUND: Medical assistance in dying (MAiD) was legalized in Canada in 2016, with legislation updated in 2021. It is unclear whether resources are available to help patients make this difficult decision; therefore, we sought to identify and quality appraise Canadian MAiD resources for supporting patients making this decision. METHODS: We conducted an environmental scan by searching Canadian websites for online MAiD resources that were published after the 2016 MAiD legislation, patient targeted, publicly accessible and able to inform decisions about MAiD in Canada. We excluded resources that targeted health care professionals or policy-makers, service protocols and personal narratives. Two authors appraised resources using the International Patient Decision Aids Standards (IPDAS) criteria and the Patient Education Materials Assessment Tool (PEMAT) for health literacy. Descriptive analysis was conducted. We defined resources as patient decision aids if 7 IPDAS defining criteria were met, and we rated resources as adequate for understandability or actionability if the PEMAT score was 70% or greater. RESULTS: We identified 80 MAiD resources. As of March 2023, 62 resources (90%) provided eligibility according to the 2021 legislation and 11 did not discuss any eligibility criteria. The median IPDAS score was 3 out of 7; 52% discussed alternative options and none provided benefits or harms. Of 80 resources, 59% were adequate for understandability and 29% were adequate for actionability. INTERPRETATION: Although many resources on MAiD were updated with 2021 legislation, few were adequate to support patients with lower health literacy. There is a need to determine whether a patient decision aid would be appropriate for people in Canada considering MAiD.

Shared decision-making conceptual models for physiotherapy: a theory analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To conduct a theory analysis of shared decision-making (SDM) conceptual models relevant to physiotherapy (PT) to help understand theoretical foundations of SDM for the PT discipline. DESIGN: A systematic review was used and updated to select models. The theory analysis was conducted following Walker and Avant's approach and relevance to six PT competency domains. RESULTS: Of the 42 SDM models identified, three were eligible. One model (PT-SDM) is explicitly for PTs, one for multimorbidity with older patients (Dynamic Model-SDM), and one for multimorbidity and chronic care (Dual Layer-SDM). Models were published between 2016 and 2019, based on the literature and developed by a range of developers. All propose a schematic linear representation, but two models highlight SDM as an iterative process (PT-SDM, Dynamic Model-SDM). Two models (PT-SDM, Dynamic Model-SDM) are inductive, logical and clear, with the PT-SDM the most generalizable to different decision and setting. Strengths of models: a) all included key SDM elements; b) all involved a variety of stakeholders during development; c) all aimed to fill a gap in clinical practice; d) two are easier to use in clinical practice (PT-SDM, Dynamic Model-SDM); and e) all are generalizable to various healthcare professionals. Limitations of models: a) two poorly described the development process (PT-SDM, Dual Layer-SDM); b) none have been tested; c) none incorporated various actors despite acknowledging the importance of multidisciplinary teams; and d) one has an important logical fallacy (Dual Layer-SDM). CONCLUSION: Two models could support physiotherapists intending to use SDM in clinical practice. CONTRIBUTION OF THE PAPER.

Feasibility of a preoperative strengthening exercise program on postoperative function in patients undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty: a pilot randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There are conflicting results on the effect of preoperative exercise programs on long-term function and little evidence on short-term function. The aim is to assess the feasibility of a preoperative strengthening exercise program in patients undergoing hip or knee joint arthroplasty in terms of trial design, recruitment, and follow-up rates. METHODS: A randomized controlled feasibility study with patients undergoing hip or knee joint arthroplasty. Patients were randomized to a preoperative strengthening exercise program or standard of care. Feasibility outcome measures were recruitment rate (≥ 50%) and loss to follow-up (≤ 15%). RESULTS: Of the 129 eligible participants, 63 participants consented to participate in the study (49%), and 27 were successfully randomized prior to surgery (43%). All 27 participants completed the baseline assessment. Of these, 6 (22%) had surgery during the exercise period. Of the remaining 21 participants, 20 (95%) completed the pre-surgery assessment. The study was terminated before five participants could be eligible for the 6-month assessment. Sixteen (76%) participants completed the 6-week post-surgery assessment. Twelve participants completed the 6-month assessment (75%). CONCLUSION: Given the recruitment rate, randomization barriers, and study participant loss to follow-up, the study was discontinued since it was not considered feasible in this current form at our clinical site despite modifications made to the protocol. Future investigations into a modified intervention via telerehabilitation should be explored. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03483519 . Retrospectively registered in March 2018.

Protocol for systematic review: patient decision aids for total hip and knee arthroplasty decision-making.

BACKGROUND: Total hip and knee arthroplasty are a highly performed surgery; however, patient satisfaction with surgery results and patient involvement in the decision-making process remains low. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) are tools used in clinical practices to facilitate active patient involvement in healthcare decision-making. Nonetheless, PtDA effects have not been systematically evaluated for hip and knee total joint arthroplasty (TJA) decision-making. The aim of this systematic review is to determine the effect of patient decision aids compared to alternative of care on quality and process of decision-making when provided to adults with hip and knee osteoarthritis considering primary elective TJA. METHODS: This systematic review will follow the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. This protocol was reported based on the PRISMA-P checklist guidelines. Studies will be searched in CINAHL, MEDLINE, Embase, PsycINFO, and Web of Science. Eligible studies will be randomized control trial (RCT) evaluating the effect of PtDA on TJA decision-making. Descriptive and meta-analysis of outcomes will include decision quality (knowledge and values-based choice), decisional conflict, patient involvement, decision-making process satisfaction, actual decision made, health outcomes, and harm(s). Risk of bias will be evaluated with Cochrane's risk of bias tool for RCTs. Quality and strength of recommendations will be appraised with Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE). DISCUSSION: This review will provide a summary of RCT findings on PtDA effect on decision-making quality and process of adults with knee and hip osteoarthritis considering primary elective TJA. Further, it will provide evidence comparing different types of PtDA used for TJA decision-making. This review is expected to inform further research on joint replacement decision-making quality and processes and on ways PtDAs facilitate shared decision-making for orthopedic surgery. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42020171334.

Développement de la version franco-canadienne du questionnaire Risk Assessment and Prediction Tool (RAPT) chez une population préhospitalière recourant à une arthroplastie de la hanche ou du genou.

Purpose: The primary purpose is to translate and assess the transcultural validity of the RAPT - a pre-operation questionnaire that helps predict the clients' post-operation process - for the French-Canadian population requiring an arthroplasty of the hip or of the knee. The second purpose is to determine the standard error of measurements of the French-Canadian version of RAPT. Method: The transcultural translation and adaptation process of RAPT follows four steps: (1) initial translation, (2) retro-translation, (3) assessment of the questionnaire's clarity by patients, 4) assessment of the translation's transcultural validity. Furthermore, the RAPT standard error of measurements was calculated. Results: Participants were recruited at the Hull and Montfort hospitals. Twenty participants were recruited for step 3 and 83 participants for step 4. Results suggest that the RAPT and the French-Canadian translation (RAPT-FC) are comparable, with intraclass, intralanguage, interlanguage and temportal interlanguage correlation coefficents that varied from 0.858 to 0.988. The standard error of measurements is 0.8. Conclusions: The RAPT-FC tool is comparable to the original English version of the RAPT. Using this questionnaire could help in the planning of postoperative resources associated to hip and knee replacements within the French-Canadian population.

Relationship Between Orthopedic Surgeon's Empathy and Inpatient Hospital Experience Scores in a Tertiary Care Academic Institution.

Studies have examined the relationship between physician empathy and patient experience, but few have explored it in surgeons. The purpose of this study was to report on orthopedic surgeon empathy in a mutlispecialty practice and explore its association with orthopedic patient experience. Patients completed the consultation and relational empathy (CARE) measure (March 2017-August 2018) and Canadian Patient Experience Survey-Inpatient Care (CPES-IC; March 2017-February 2019) to assess empathy and patient experience, respectively. Consultation and relational empathy measures were correlated to CPES-IC for 3 surgeon-related questions pertaining to respect, listening, and explaining. Surgeon CARE scores (n = 1134) ranged from 42.0 ± 9.1 to 48.6 ± 2.4 with 50.4% of patients rating their surgeon as perfectly empathic. There were no significant differences between surgeons for CPES-IC continuous and topbox scores (n = 834) for respect and correlations between CPES-IC questions. The CARE measure for both continuous and topbox scores were weak to moderate, but none were significant. Empathy was associated with surgeon respect and careful listening, despite lack of significant correlation. Possible future work could use an empathy tool more appropriate for this surgeon population.

Development of the French-Canadian Version of the Self-Administered Comorbidities Questionnaire (SCQ) in a hospital population undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty.

The Self-Administered Comorbidity Questionnaire (SCQ) is a tool used by hospitalized patients to self-report their comorbidities. It can help to explain the effectiveness of hip or knee arthroplasty, its complications, the length of hospital stay and perioperative resource utilization. HYPOTHESIS: The French-Canadian version of the SCQ will be suitable for use in a Canadian hospital population. OBJECTIVES: (1) translate and evaluate the transcultural validity of the SCQ in a French Canadian population undergoing hip or knee arthroplasty; (2) determine the standard error of measurement (SEM) in the French Canadian version. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The translation and transcultural adaptation process consisted of four steps: (1) initial translation; (2) back translation; (3) assessment of questionnaire clarity with patients; (4) assessment of the translation's transcultural validity. The SEM was also calculated. RESULTS: Twenty participants were recruited for step 3 and 83 participants for step 4. The original English version of the SCQ and the translated French-Canadian version (SCQ-FC) were similar with intra-class correlation coefficients for the intra-language and inter-language agreement between 0.71 and 0.97. The SEM was 1.92. CONCLUSION: The SCQ-FC is comparable to the original English language version. Using this questionnaire allows us to document the comorbidities present in patients undergoing hip and knee arthroplasty in a French-Canadian population, and the impact of these comorbidities on the patients' health. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: V, Prospective study.