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).

Translation, cross-cultural adaption, validity and reliability of a composite physical function scale for adults aged 65 + years in a Danish context.

BACKGROUND: To prevent or postpone dependence on help in everyday activities, early identification of adults aged 65 + years at risk of functional decline or with progressing functional decline is essential. The American Composite Physical Function (CPF) scale was developed to detect and prevent this age-conditioned decline. In this study, the aim was to translate and adapt the scale into a Danish version and assess the validity and reliability in Danish adults aged 65 + years. METHODS: A forward-backward translation procedure was used, followed by an expert panel review to finalise the Danish version of the CPF scale. In the subsequent pre-test, three-step cognitive interviews and hypotheses testing were performed to evaluate the validity, and a test-retest was done to assess reliability. RESULTS: In the pre-test, 47 adults participated in three-step cognitive interviews, and 45 adults answered an online version of the scale. In terms of content validity, the scale was relevant and easy to answer, although many informants skipped the instruction to the questionnaire, which may negatively impact face validity. Construct validity showed a significant difference in CPF scores in adults aged 65 + years by residence and activity level and a decreasing CPF score with increasing age. The reliability test showed an excellent kappa (0.92). CONCLUSION: The scale covering daily activities helps to identify adults aged 65 + years with reduced physical functions or at risk of loss of independence. Further research is needed to assess the CPF predictive value for adults aged 65 + years at risk of or with a progressing physical decline.

Translation and cultural adaption of the emergency department-consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems (ED CAPHS)-A questionnaire to measure patient experience in Denmark.

AIM: The aim of this study was to translate and culturally adapt The Emergency Department-Consumer Assessment of Healthcare Providers and Systems (ED CAPHS) to the Danish ED context. BACKGROUND: In Denmark, a large number of patients attend emergency departments (ED) every year. During their ED visits, examinations, tests and encounters with different healthcare professionals occur frequently. Moreover, patients receive much information. Patients' direct experiences of care can provide valuable insights into what works and what does not in health care. The emergency department-consumer assessment of healthcare providers and systems (ED CAPHS) is a valid questionnaire designed to measure patients' experiences with ED care and is intended for patients discharged home following their ED visit. METHOD: The translation process was systematically planned and executed using the principles of good practice for the translation and cultural adaptation process for patient-reported outcomes (PRO) guidelines by the ISPOR. RESULTS: The translation and cultural adaption process were successfully conducted. Three items concerning language and race were omitted as they are not distinct in Danish ED context. Furthermore, a few conceptual factors and linguistic challenges were discussed and harmonised during the reconciliation and harmonisation process respectively. The Danish survey ED CAPHS DK containing 32 items was proofread and finalised. CONCLUSION: Overall, patients reported that the survey was relevant and comprehensive, as it focused on essential factors when discharged directly home after an ED admission. ED CAPHS DK is found to be content valid and ready for use. However, a future study testing the Danish version using confirmative factor analysis and internal consistency reliability is needed to ensure construct validity and reliability.

Association of patient-reported outcomes and ovarian cancer recurrence.

BACKGROUND: The vast majority of patients with advanced ovarian cancer experience disease recurrence after primary treatment. OBJECTIVE: To explore the diagnostic accuracy of repeated measurement of patient-reported outcomes and quality-of-life scores in relation to ovarian cancer recurrence. METHODS: Patients with ovarian cancer were recruited to the PROMova study by the end of their primary treatment at eight centers in Denmark. The purpose of the PROMova study was to explore the applicability of repeated use of patient-reported outcomes, which consisted of the European Organization for Research and Treatment of Cancer generic questionnaire and the ovarian specific questionnaire. The patient-reported outcomes were completed 3, 6, 9, 12, and 15 months after enrollment or until recurrence. The 3-month interval between completions was the period in which recurrence was assessed. Imaging and the biomarker CA125 were used as reference modality for recurrence. Mixed effects logistic regression was used to investigate the association between mean patient-reported outcome scores and recurrence. Receiver operating curves were used to establish cut-off scores. The diagnostic accuracy of patient-reported outcomes, including sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values was estimated based on the Youden index. For combined scales, diagnostic accuracy was investigated based on multivariate analysis. RESULTS: The analysis included 196 patients with an overall recurrence rate of 50.5% and an overall mean time to recurrence of 302 days. With imaging as reference, patients with recurrence reported significantly lower global health, worse physical functioning, and more abdominal symptoms preceding recurrence. With CA125 as reference, global health, physical and emotional functioning were impaired. Despite the worsening of a number of symptoms prior to recurrence whichever reference modality was applied, the patient-reported outcome scores did not provide adequate diagnostic accuracy. CONCLUSION: Repeated use of patient-reported outcomes during surveillance of ovarian cancer was not of diagnostic value. Future efforts should be directed at improving the administration of patient-reported outcomes as well as exploring the potential of using these outcomes as an indicator of clinical relevance.

Translation and cultural adaption of the control preference scale across various care settings in a Danish hospital.

BACKGROUND: In recent decades, there has been a growing emphasis on involving patients in healthcare decision-making, driven by political, ethical, and research considerations. Although patient involvement is associated with improved health outcomes, understanding patient preferences regarding their role in decision-making is crucial for effective interventions. The Control Preferences Scale (CPS) measures patient preferences along a continuum from passive to active participation. However, its application in Denmark necessitates translation and cultural adaptation. METHODOLOGY: This study aimed to translate and culturally adapt the CPS for Danish use across diverse healthcare settings: acute care, cancer care, elective surgery, chronic medical treatment, and parental involvement in pediatric care. Following a cross-sectional design, the translation process was systematically planned and executed using Beaton's guidelines, including the five stages: forward and back translation, synthesis, expert review, and pre-testing. RESULTS: The translation and adaption process was carried out successfully. Few linguistic challenges were identified and resolved by the expert review. The findings of the pre-testing indicated high acceptability and usability of the adapted CPS among 152 Danish patients and parents. The collaborative role emerged as the most preferred across settings (69.8%), with passive roles more prevalent among cancer patients (30%) and parents waiting with their child to see a pediatrician (23.3%). Notable, more women preferred collaborative or active roles (83.9%) than men (73.9%). The content validity assessment yielded positive feedback, affirming the relevance and comprehensiveness of the CPS. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, the adaptation and validation of the CPS for Danish use proved successful, providing a valuable tool for assessing patient's role preferences in healthcare decision-making. However, future studies are recommended to ensure construct validity and reliability through psychometric testing.