Shared decision-making for non-operative management versus operative management of hip fractures in selected frail older adults with a limited life expectancy: a protocol for a nationwide implementation study.

BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: Recent research has highlighted non-operative management (NOM) as a viable alternative for frail older adults with hip fractures in the final phase of life. This study aims to guide Dutch physicians and hospitals nationwide in a standardised implementation of shared decision-making regarding surgery or NOM in selected frail older adults with a hip fracture. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The patient population for implementation includes frail older adults aged ≥70 years with an acute proximal femoral fracture, nursing home care or a similar level of care elsewhere and at least one additional criterion (ie, malnutrition, severe mobility impairment or ASA≥4). The 2-year implementation study will be conducted in four phases. In phases 1 and 2, barriers and facilitators for implementation will be identified and an implementation protocol, educational materials and patient information will be developed. Phase 3 will involve an implementation pilot in 14 hospitals across the Netherlands. The protocol and educational material will be improved based on healthcare provider and patient experiences gathered through interviews. Phase 4 will focus on upscaling to nationwide implementation and the effect of the implementation on NOM rate will be measured using data from the Dutch Hip Fracture Audit. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The study was exempted by the local Medical Research Ethics Committee (MEC-2023-0270, 10 May 2023) and Medical Ethics Committee United (W23.083, 26 April 2023). The study's results will be submitted to an open access international peer-reviewed journal. Its protocols, tools and results will be presented at several national and international academic conferences of relevant orthogeriatric (scientific) associations. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT06079905 .

The influence of health literacy, anxiety and education on shared decision making and decisional conflict in older adults, and the mediating role of patient participation: A video observational study.

OBJECTIVE: To explore the relationship between personal characteristics of older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs) and perceived shared decision making (SDM) resp. decisional conflict. METHODS: In a video-observational study (N = 213) data were collected on personal characteristics. The main outcomes were perceived level of SDM and decisional conflict. The mediating variable was participation in the SDM process. A twostep mixed effect multilinear regression and a mediation analysis were performed to analyze the data. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 77.3 years and 56.3% were female. Health literacy (ß.01, p < .001) was significantly associated with participation in the SDM process. Education (ß = -2.43, p = .05) and anxiety (ß = -.26, p = .058) had a marginally significant direct effect on the patients' perceived level of SDM. Education (ß = 12.12, p = .002), health literacy (ß = -.70, p = .005) and anxiety (ß = 1.19, p = .004) had a significant direct effect on decisional conflict. The effect of health literacy on decisional conflict was mediated by participation in SDM. CONCLUSION: Health literacy, anxiety and education are associated with decisional conflict. Participation in SDM during consultations plays a mediating role in the relationship between health literacy and decisional conflict. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Tailoring SDM communication to health literacy levels is important for high quality SDM.

Effects of a shared decision making intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions: the DICO study.

BACKGROUND: To evaluate the effects of a shared decision making (SDM) intervention for older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs). METHODS: A pragmatic trial evaluated the effects of the SDMMCC intervention, existing of SDM training for nine geriatricians in two hospitals and a preparatory tool for patients. A prospective pre-intervention post-intervention multi-center clinical study was conducted in which an usual care group of older patients with MCC and their informal caregivers was included before the implementation of the intervention and a new cohort of patients and informal caregivers after the implementation of the intervention. SDM was observed using the OPTIONMCC during video-recorded consultations. Patient- and caregivers reported outcomes regarding their role in SDM, involvement, perceived SDM and decisional conflict were measured. The differences between groups regarding the level of observed SDM (OPTIONMCC) were analyzed with a mixed model analysis. Dichotomous patient-reported outcomes were analyzed with a logistic mixed model. RESULTS: From two outpatient geriatric clinics 216 patients with MCCs participated. The mean age was 77.3 years, and 56.3% of patients were female. No significant difference was found in the overall level of SDM as measured with the OPTIONMCC or in patient-reported outcomes. However, at item level the items discussing 'goals', 'options', and 'decision making' significantly improved after the intervention. The items discussing 'partnership' and 'evaluating the decision-making process' showed a significant decrease. Fifty-two percent of the patients completed the preparatory tool, but the results were only discussed in 12% of the consultations. CONCLUSION: This study provides scope for improvement of SDM in geriatrics. Engaging older adults with MCCs and informal caregivers in the decision making process should be an essential part of SDM training for geriatricians, beyond the SDM steps of explaining options, benefits and harms. More attention should be paid to the integration of preparatory work in the consultation.

Lessons Learned From the COVID-19 Pandemic as Experienced by Older Adults Treated for COVID-19.

Background: In order to provide the best care, the perspective of older COVID-19 patients must be involved in the development of treatment protocols. This study describes the experiences of older adults affected by COVID-19 who recovered in the hospital or at home. Methods: Qualitative semi-structured interviews were conducted with 23 older adults affected by COVID-19. A content-based thematic analysis was conducted. Results: Nine categories were identified as recurring topics, which were grouped into three major themes. The first theme describes experiences in the first phase of the disease when older adults fell ill. The second theme includes experiences during the illness, ranging from illness severity to participation in decision-making, communication barriers and isolation effects. The final theme covers the recovery course, residual symptoms and social aspects. Conclusion: Older adults treated for COVID-19 experienced a feeling of being in a fast-paced whirlwind and lost total control over the situation. Extra attention should be paid to shared decision making, coordinated information provision and the instalment of a primary contract to the patient. The uncertainty of their situation, isolation measures and fears could result in psychological consequences and hinder rehabilitation in older adults.

Professionals' views on shared decision-making in severe aortic stenosis.

OBJECTIVE: To provide insight into professionals' perceptions of and experiences with shared decision-making (SDM) in the treatment of symptomatic patients with severe aortic stenosis (AS). METHODS: A semistructured interview study was performed in the heart centres of academic and large teaching hospitals in the Netherlands between June and December 2020. Cardiothoracic surgeons, interventional cardiologists, nurse practitioners and physician assistants (n=21) involved in the decision-making process for treatment of severe AS were interviewed. An inductive thematic analysis was used to identify, analyse and report patterns in the data. RESULTS: Four primary themes were generated: (1) the concept of SDM, (2) knowledge, (3) communication and interaction, and (4) implementation of SDM. Not all respondents considered patient participation as an element of SDM. They experienced a discrepancy between patients' wishes and treatment options. Respondents explained that not knowing patient preferences for health improvement hinders SDM and complicating patient characteristics for patient participation were perceived. A shared responsibility for improving SDM was suggested for patients and all professionals involved in the decision-making process for severe AS. CONCLUSIONS: Professionals struggle to make highly complex treatment decisions part of SDM and to embed patients' expectations of treatment and patients' preferences. Additionally, organisational constraints complicate the SDM process. To ensure sustainable high-quality care, professionals should increase their awareness of patient participation in SDM, and collaboration in the pathway for decision-making in severe AS is required to support the documentation and availability of information according to the principles of SDM.

Barriers and facilitators for shared decision making in older patients with multiple chronic conditions: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to describe barriers and facilitators for shared decision making (SDM) as experienced by older patients with multiple chronic conditions (MCCs), informal caregivers and health professionals. METHODS: A structured literature search was conducted with 5 databases. Two reviewers independently assessed studies for eligibility and performed a quality assessment. The results from the included studies were summarized using a predefined taxonomy. RESULTS: Our search yielded 3838 articles. Twenty-eight studies, listing 149 perceived barriers and 67 perceived facilitators for SDM, were included. Due to poor health and cognitive and/or physical impairments, older patients with MCCs participate less in SDM. Poor interpersonal skills of health professionals are perceived as hampering SDM, as do organizational barriers, such as pressure for time and high turnover of patients. However, among older patients with MCCs, SDM could be facilitated when patients share information about personal values, priorities and preferences, as well as information about quality of life and functional status. Informal caregivers may facilitate SDM by assisting patients with decision support, although informal caregivers can also complicate the SDM process, for example, when they have different views on treatment or the patient's capability to be involved. Coordination of care when multiple health professionals are involved is perceived as important. CONCLUSIONS: Although poor health is perceived as a barrier to participate in SDM, the personal experience of living with MCCs is considered valuable input in SDM. An explicit invitation to participate in SDM is important to older adults. Health professionals need a supporting organizational context and good communication skills to devise an individualized approach for patient care.

The development of the evidence-based SDMMCC intervention to improve shared decision making in geriatric outpatients: the DICO study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) contributes to personalized decisions that fit the personal preferences of patients when choosing a treatment for a condition. However, older adults frequently face multiple chronic conditions (MCC). Therefore, implementing SDM requires special features. The aim of this paper is to describe the development of an intervention to improve SDM in older adults with MCC. METHODS: Following the Medical Research Council framework for developing complex interventions, the SDMMCC intervention was developed step-wise. Based on a literature review and empirical research in a co-creation process with end users, we developed training for geriatricians and a preparatory tool for older patients with MCC and informal caregivers. After assessing feasibility, the intervention was implemented in a pilot study (N = 108) in two outpatient geriatric clinics of an academic and a non-academic teaching hospital in Amsterdam, the Netherlands. RESULTS: Key elements of the training for geriatricians include developing skills to involve older adults with MCC and informal caregivers in SDM and following the six-step 'Dynamic model for SDM with frail older patients', as well as learning how to explore personal goals related to quality of life and how to form a partnership with the patient and the informal caregiver. Key elements of the preparatory tool for patients include an explicit invitation to participate in SDM, nomination that the patient's own knowledge is valuable, invitation to form a partnership with the geriatrician, encouragement to share information about daily and social functioning and exploration of possible goals. Furthermore, the invitation of informal caregivers to share their concerns was also a key element. CONCLUSIONS: Through a process of co-creation, both training for geriatricians and a preparatory tool for older adults and their informal caregivers were developed, tailored to the needs of the end users and based on the 'Dynamic model of SDM with frail older patients'.

Recommendations of older adults on how to use the PROM 'TOPICS-MDS' in healthcare conversations: A Delphi study.

In shared decision making, the exploration of preferred personal health outcomes is important. Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) provide input for discussions between patients and healthcare professionals. The Older Persons and Informal Caregivers Survey Minimum DataSet (TOPICS-MDS) PROM is a multidimensional questionnaire on the physical and mental health and wellbeing of older adults. This study investigates how the TOPICS-MDS could be used in individual healthcare conversations. We explored views of older adults regarding 1) whether the health domains they want to discuss are included in the TOPICS-MDS and 2) the comprehensibility of the TOPICS-MDS for healthcare conversations with older adults. A three-round Delphi study was conducted. A total of 57 older adults participated in the study, the mean (SD) age was 71.5 (8.5) years, and 78.9% of the participants were female. The participants were divided into four panels based on educational level and cultural background. We used online questionnaires and focus groups. Consensus was pre-defined to be the point when ≥75% of the participants agreed that a domain was important or very important (scored on a 5-point Likert scale). The inter-expert agreement was computed for Round 1 and 3 with Kendall's W. Round 2 was a focus-group. Qualitative data were analyzed by content analysis. Older adults considered 'functional limitations', 'emotional wellbeing', 'social functioning' and 'quality of life' to be important domains of the TOPICS-MDS to discuss in healthcare conversations. The participants added 'coping with stress', 'dealing with health conditions and the effects on life' as extra domains for healthcare conversations. Challenges regarding the comprehensibility of the TOPICS-MDS included difficult words and lengthy or sensitive questions. Questions that included multiple topics were difficult to understand. The TOPICS-MDS covers the domains of life that older adults value as important to discuss with healthcare professionals, and two additional domains were identified. For older adults with a low level of education or a culturally diverse background, the TOPICS-MDS needs to be adjusted for comprehensibility.

Measuring triadic decision making in older patients with multiple chronic conditions: Observer OPTIONMCC.

OBJECTIVE: To develop a valid and reliable tool to measure triadic decision making between older adults with multiple chronic conditions (MCC), their informal caregivers and geriatricians. METHODS: Video observational study with cross-sectional assessment of interaction during medical consultations between geriatricians (n = 10), patients (n = 108) and informal caregivers (68) by three calibrated raters at the geriatric outpatient department of two Dutch hospitals. The Observer OPTIONMCC instrument was developed, based on the 'Dynamic model of SDM in frail older patients' and the 'Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making - 5 item scale' (Observer OPTION-5). RESULTS: Factor analysis confirms that it is acceptable to regard the new scale as a single construct. The 7-item single factor solution explained 62.76% of the variability for geriatricians, 61.60% of the variability for patients and 54.32% of the variability for informal caregivers. The inter-rater ICC for the total Observer OPTIONMCC score was .96, .96, and .95 (resp. geriatricians, patients, informal caregivers), with values ranging from .60 to .95 for individual items, showing good levels of agreement. CONCLUSION AND PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: We conclude that Observer OPTIONMCC is sufficiently valid and reliable to be used for the assessment of triadic SDM in populations of older patients with MCC.

Development and Usability of ADappt: Web-Based Tool to Support Clinicians, Patients, and Caregivers in the Diagnosis of Mild Cognitive Impairment and Alzheimer Disease.

BACKGROUND: As a result of advances in diagnostic testing in the field of Alzheimer disease (AD), patients are diagnosed in earlier stages of the disease, for example, in the stage of mild cognitive impairment (MCI). This poses novel challenges for a clinician during the diagnostic workup with regard to diagnostic testing itself, namely, which tests are to be performed, but also on how to engage patients in this decision and how to communicate test results. As a result, tools to support decision making and improve risk communication could be valuable for clinicians and patients. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to present the design, development, and testing of a Web-based tool for clinicians in a memory clinic setting and to ascertain whether this tool can (1) facilitate the interpretation of biomarker results in individual patients with MCI regarding their risk of progression to dementia, (2) support clinicians in communicating biomarker test results and risks to MCI patients and their caregivers, and (3) support clinicians in a process of shared decision making regarding the diagnostic workup of AD. METHODS: A multiphase mixed-methods approach was used. Phase 1 consisted of a qualitative needs assessment among professionals, patients, and caregivers; phase 2, consisted of an iterative process of development and the design of the tool (ADappt); and phase 3 consisted of a quantitative and qualitative assessment of usability and acceptability of ADappt. Across these phases, co-creation was realized via a user-centered qualitative approach with clinicians, patients, and caregivers. RESULTS: In phase 1, clinicians indicated the need for risk calculation tools and visual aids to communicate test results to patients. Patients and caregivers expressed their needs for more specific information on their risk for developing AD and related consequences. In phase 2, we developed the content and graphical design of ADappt encompassing 3 modules: a risk calculation tool, a risk communication tool including a summary sheet for patients and caregivers, and a conversation starter to support shared decision making regarding the diagnostic workup. In phase 3, ADappt was considered to be clear and user-friendly. CONCLUSIONS: Clinicians in a memory clinic setting can use ADappt, a Web-based tool, developed using multiphase design and co-creation, for support that includes an individually tailored interpretation of biomarker test results, communication of test results and risks to patients and their caregivers, and shared decision making on diagnostic testing.