Shared decision-making related to treatment of haemophilia: A scoping review of influential factors and available support tools.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment selection in haemophilia is increasingly challenging given evolving therapeutic options and the need for individualization. Shared decision-making (SDM) approaches have recently gained interest, though a synthesis of available studies is lacking. AIM: A scoping review was conducted to summarize literature reporting on factors impacting treatment SDM in haemophilia and tools or models available to support such decisions. METHODS: PubMed, Embase, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and grey literature were searched for studies published through August 2023. Original studies reporting on facilitators and barriers to haemophilia SDM and SDM tools were included and analyzed for themes, characteristics and gaps. RESULTS: A total of 625 records were identified and 14 unique studies were selected (factors influencing treatment SDM, n = 7; SDM tools, n = 7). The studies typically included input from persons with haemophilia, caregivers and healthcare practitioners (HCPs). Thematic organization of factors influencing SDM revealed three main categories: knowledge, patient characteristics and HCP-patient interactions. Availability of information was a commonly reported facilitator of SDM, while poor HCP-patient engagement was a commonly reported barrier. Tools varied in focus, with some facilitating general treatment SDM while others supported selection of certain therapy types. The studies underscored additional factors critical for SDM, such as alignment of HCP-patient perceptions, shared language and tailoring of tools to specific subpopulations. CONCLUSION: Few studies report on treatment SDM factors and tools in haemophilia; available tools vary considerably. It remains unclear whether published tools have been successfully implemented into clinical practice. Additional research is warranted.

Preferences and Health-Related Quality-of-Life Related to Disease and Treatment Features for Patients with Hemophilia A in a Canadian General Population Sample.

BACKGROUND: Current treatments for hemophilia A in Canada include on-demand treatment as bleeds occur and regular intravenous prophylactic factor VIII (FVIII) infusions. The subcutaneous therapy emicizumab was recently approved for treatment of hemophilia A. The objective of this study was to estimate utility values associated with hemophilia A health and treatment states from a Canadian societal perspective, including preferences related to treatment efficacy and frequency and route of administration. METHODS: A vignette-based time trade-off (TTO) utilities elicitation was undertaken in Canadian adults to compare preferences for six hemophilia health states describing prophylactic and on-demand treatment, with varying bleed rates and frequency of treatment administration. A convenience sample was recruited via market research panels and snowball sampling. Health state/vignette definitions were informed by clinical experience, clinical trial results regarding bleed frequency, and validated by qualitative interviews of hemophilia patients and caregivers (n=10). Utilities were estimated via an online, trained interviewer-guided, vignette-based TTO exercise, where respondents valuated health states describing hemophilia patients (adults or children) receiving subcutaneous prophylaxis, intravenous prophylaxis, and on-demand treatments. Analyses included a descriptive analysis by health state; a mixed-effects analysis of utility values adjusted for subcutaneous vs infusion-based therapies and number of bleeds; and for prophylactic regimens, an analysis of utilities by frequency of infusions or injections. RESULTS: TTO interviews were conducted with 82 respondents. Mean utilities [95% CI] were highest for subcutaneous prophylaxis (0.90 [0.87-0.93]), followed by intravenous prophylaxis (0.81 [0.78-0.85]), and on-demand treatment (0.70 [0.65-0.76]). In regression analysis, subcutaneous treatment health states were associated with a utility increment of +0.1112. Additional bleeds and more frequent infusions were associated with lower utility values (-0.0027 per bleed and -0.0003 per infusion). CONCLUSION: Subcutaneous prophylaxis is associated with higher utility values compared to intravenous prophylactic and on-demand treatment, while increased bleeds and infusions are associated with reduced utility.

Trial of Essiac to ascertain its effect in women with breast cancer (TEA-BC).

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is a major cause of morbidity, mortality, and medical expenditures among women in Canada. Essiac (Resperin Canada Limited, Waterloo, Ontario, Canada), a blend of at least four herbs (burdock root [Arctium lappa], Indian rhubarb [Rheum palmatum], sheep sorrel [Rumex acetosella], and the inner bark of slippery elm [Ulmus fulva or U. rubra]), has become one of the more popular herbal remedies for breast-cancer treatment, secondary prevention, improving quality of life, and controlling negative side-effects of conventional breast-cancer treatment. OBJECTIVES: Our primary objective was to determine the difference in health-related quality of life (HR-QOL), as assessed by the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy Breast Cancer Version, between women who are new Essiac users (since breast cancer diagnosis) and those who have never used Essiac. Secondary endpoints included differences in depression, anxiety, fatigue, rate of adverse events, and prevalence of complications or benefits associated with Essiac during standard breast-cancer treatment. Additionally, we described the pattern of use of Essiac in this cohort of women. METHODS: We performed a retrospective cohort study in 510 women, randomly chosen from the Ontario Cancer Tumour Registry, with a diagnosis of primary breast cancer in 2003. RESULTS: With the exception changes in a Physical well-being subscale and a relationship with doctor subscale, Essiac did not have a significant effect on HR-QOL or mood states. Even for Physical well-being and relationship with doctor, Essiac seemed to have a negative effect, with Essiac users doing worse than the non-Essiac users. This might be attributed to the fact that the group of users comprised younger women with more advanced stages of breast cancer, and both of these subgroups of patients have been shown to be at a significantly increased risk for negative mood states and/or a decreased sense of well-being. The women were taking low doses (total daily dose 43.6 +/- 30.8 mL) of Essiac that corresponded to the label directions found on most Essiac products. Friends were the most common source of information, and most women were taking Essiac to boost their immune systems or increase their chances of survival. Only 2 women reported minor adverse events, whereas numerous women reported beneficial effects of Essiac. CONCLUSIONS: Essiac does not appear to improve HR-QOL or mood states. Future studies are needed to determine whether other clinical outcomes, such as cancer reoccurrence, are affected by Essiac.

Roles and responsibilities of pharmacists with respect to natural health products: key informant interviews.

BACKGROUND: Although many pharmacies sell natural health products (NHPs), there is no clear definition as to the roles and responsibilities (if any) of pharmacists with respect to these products. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to explore pharmacy and stakeholder leaders' perceptions of pharmacists' professional NHP roles and responsibilities. METHODS: Semi-structured key informant interviews were conducted with pharmacy leaders (n=17) and stakeholder (n=18) leaders representing consumers, complementary and alternative medicine practitioners, conventional health care practitioners, and industry across Canada. RESULTS: All participants believed a main NHP responsibility for pharmacists was in safety monitoring, although a one challenge identified in the interviews was pharmacists' general lack of NHP knowledge; however, stakeholder leaders did not expect pharmacists to be experts, but should have a basic level of knowledge about NHPs. CONCLUSION: Participants described pharmacists' professional roles and responsibilities for NHPs as similar to those for over-the-counter drugs; more awareness of existing NHP-related pharmacy policies is needed, and pharmacy owners/managers should provide additional training to ensure front-line pharmacists have appropriate knowledge of NHPs sold in the pharmacy.