ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Patients with vestibular schwannomas (VS) are faced with complex management decisions. Watchful waiting, surgical resection, and radiation are all viable options with associated risks and benefits. We sought to determine if patients with VS experience decisional conflict when deciding between surgery or non-surgical management, and factors influencing the degree of decisional conflict. METHODS: A prospective cohort study in two tertiary ambulatory skull-base clinics was performed. Patients with newly diagnosed or newly growing vestibular schwannomas were recruited. Patients were given a demographic form and the decisional conflict scale (DCS), a validated measure to assess the degree of uncertainty when making medical decisions. The degree of shared decision making (SDM) experienced by the patient and physician were assessed via the SDM-Q-10 and SDM-Q-Doc questionnaires, respectively. Non-parametric statistics were used. Questionnaires and demographic information were correlated with DCS using Spearman correlation coefficient and Mann-Whitney U. Logistic regression was performed to determine factors independently associated with DCS scores. RESULTS: Seventy-seven patients participated (55% female, aged 37-81 years); VS ranged in size from 2 mm-50 mm. Significant decisional conflict (DCS score 25 or greater) was experienced by 17 (22%) patients. Patients reported an average SDM-Q-10 score of 86, indicating highly perceived level of SDM. Physician and patient SDM scores were weakly correlated (p = 0.045, Spearman correlation coefficient 0.234). DCS scores were significantly negatively correlated with a decision to pursue surgery, presence of a trainee, and higher SDM-Q-10 score. DCS was higher with female gender. Using logistic regression, the SDM-Q-10 score was the only variable associated with significantly reduced DCS. CONCLUSIONS: About one fifth of patients deciding how to manage their vestibular schwannoma experienced a significant degree of decisional conflict. Involving the patients in the process through shared decision-making significantly reduced the degree of uncertainty patients experienced.
Subject(s)
Conflict, Psychological , Decision Making , Neuroma, Acoustic/therapy , Patient Participation , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Female , Humans , Logistic Models , Male , Middle Aged , Patients/psychology , Prospective Studies , Statistics, Nonparametric , Surveys and QuestionnairesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The elective nature of pediatric otoplasty requires that parents are well educated regarding the risks involved. Simple educational tools have been found to enhance risk recall in some surgical procedures. OBJECTIVE: To assess the effectiveness of information handouts in improving parental risk recall. METHODS: Fifty caregivers were randomly assigned to receive traditional oral dialog of the surgical risks, or to receive oral discussion and a written handout outlining the risks of otoplasty. Twelve to 14 days after the consultation, parents were contacted for assessment of risk recall. RESULTS: Overall risk recall was 48% (3.4 of 7 risks recalled). Bleeding (82%) was the most commonly recalled risk, while cartilage necrosis/deformation (14%) was the least recalled risk. Mean risk recall was higher in the group that received written information (3.9 of 7 risks) compared to the group that received only oral discussion (2.8 of 7 risks) (p=0.003). No child or parental variables were significantly related to higher risk recall on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Caregiver risk recall in pediatric otoplasty was improved with the addition of written information provided during the informed consent process. As the consent process serves a vital role in pediatric otolaryngology, the use of supplementary educational materials should be further studied.
Subject(s)
Ear, External/surgery , Informed Consent , Mental Recall , Parents/psychology , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Plastic Surgery Procedures/adverse effects , Adult , Child , Humans , Pamphlets , Prospective Studies , Risk Factors , Single-Blind MethodABSTRACT
Newborn hearing screening is an established healthcare standard in many countries and testing is feasible using otoacoustic emission (OAE) recording. It is well documented that OAEs can be suppressed by acoustic stimulation of the ear contralateral to the test ear. In clinical otoacoustic emission testing carried out in a sound attenuating booth, ambient noise levels are low such that the efferent system is not activated. However in newborn hearing screening, OAEs are often recorded in hospital or clinic environments, where ambient noise levels can be 60-70 dB SPL. Thus, results in the test ear can be influenced by ambient noise stimulating the opposite ear. Surprisingly, in hearing screening protocols there are no recommendations for avoiding contralateral suppression, that is, protecting the opposite ear from noise by blocking the ear canal. In the present study we have compared transient evoked and distortion product OAEs measured with and without contralateral ear plugging, in environmental settings with ambient noise levels <25 dB SPL, 45 dB SPL, and 55 dB SPL. We found out that without contralateral ear occlusion, ambient noise levels above 55 dB SPL can significantly attenuate OAE signals. We strongly suggest contralateral ear occlusion in OAE based hearing screening in noisy environments.
