Shared decision-making in medical encounters regarding breast cancer treatment: the contribution of methodological triangulation.

The aim of this study on shared decision-making in the doctor-patient encounter about surgical treatment for early-stage breast cancer, conducted in a regional cancer centre in France, was to further the understanding of patient perceptions on shared decision-making. The study used methodological triangulation to collect data (both quantitative and qualitative) about patient preferences in the context of a clinical consultation in which surgeons followed a shared decision-making protocol. Data were analysed from a multi-disciplinary research perspective (social psychology and health economics). The triangulated data collection methods were questionnaires (n = 132), longitudinal interviews (n = 47) and observations of consultations (n = 26). Methodological triangulation revealed levels of divergence and complementarity between qualitative and quantitative results that suggest new perspectives on the three inter-related notions of decision-making, participation and information. Patients' responses revealed important differences between shared decision-making and participation per se. The authors note that subjecting patients to a normative behavioural model of shared decision-making in an era when paradigms of medical authority are shifting may undermine the patient's quest for what he or she believes is a more important right: a guarantee of the best care available.

[How to evaluate the quality of information transfer from physician to patient? Choice of psychometric tests for a decision tree in a Regional Cancer Centre]. / Comment évaluer la qualité du transfert de l'information du médecin au patient? Le choix des tests psychométriques d'un tableau de décision dans un Centre Régional de Lutte contre le Cancer.

BACKGROUND: Decision boards are used to transfer information from physicians to patients to help them participate in the clinical decision-making process. We present the tests and results of the psychometric properties of a decision board in a sample of healthy volunteers. METHODS: In the Regional Cancer Centre located in Lyon, we developed a decision board for post-menopausal women with breast cancer after lumpectomy without any poor prognostic factors. Two treatment options were proposed, one involving chemotherapy and the other not. We tested for the following psychometric properties: comprehension, construct validity and reliability. Comprehension was evaluated using a questionnaire, in order to test whether the rates of correct answers were due to chance alone. The construct validity was assessed by changing the information provided (relapse and survival rates, characteristics of chemotherapy) and testing whether the proportion of healthy volunteers choosing an option changed in a predictable and significant way. The reliability was evaluated using the test-retest method. Two reliability statistics were computed: the Pearson correlation and the Intraclass Correlation Coefficient. RESULTS: In the sample of 40 healthy volunteers, 23 chose the option with chemotherapy and 17 the option without chemotherapy. Results show that the decision board was comprehensive, valid (the women changed their choices in a predictable way) and reliable (Pearson correlation and Intraclass Correlation Coefficient close to 1). CONCLUSION: The choice of the psychometrics properties tested and the statistical tests used are discussed. The psychometric properties of our tool are found to be satisfactory.

Shared decision-making in question.

Over recent years, communication within the physician-patient relationship has been profoundly changing. New modes of conveying diagnostic and therapeutic information influence the way in which decisions regarding treatment are made. We propose a critical review of the various theoretical models as presented in the literature, from the paternalistic to the shared decision model, in order to reveal conceptual ambiguities and their related methodological problems. This analysis leads to a project for clarifying these problems through a research protocol based on shared decision-making.

Economic impact of harmonizing medical practices: compliance with clinical practice guidelines in the follow-up of breast cancer in a French Comprehensive Cancer Center.

PURPOSE: The introduction of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) and the increasing desire to harmonize clinical practices draw attention to the economic impact of these trends. In 1994, CPGs were introduced in a French Comprehensive Cancer Center (Centre Régional Léon Bérard, Lyon). We evaluated the application of these CPGs in addition to the consequences of harmonizing clinical practices with respect to the distribution of resources by specifically analyzing the posttherapeutic follow-up of patients with localized breast cancer. METHODS: A before-and-after analysis of the records of patients who received posttherapeutic follow-up for localized breast cancer as of either 1993 or 1995 was performed. Two hundred records were chosen at random, 100 from 1993 and 100 from 1995. Follow-up was continued for as long as possible and CPG compliance was studied for each year of the follow-up periods. RESULTS: Follow-up that was not CPG-compliant required a significantly greater amount of resources. This difference was due to neither consultations nor mammographies, but was due to other examinations that were systematically performed without any warning signs to justify them. Depending on the follow-up year, noncompliant follow-up cost the Social Security from 2.2 to 3.6 times more than compliant follow-up. A noticeable change in medical practices was observed after the introduction of CPGs in 1994. This was confirmed by a sharp decrease in mean Social Security expenditure per patient of more than one third between 1993 and 1995, regardless of the follow-up year considered. CONCLUSION: In the follow-up of patients with localized breast cancer, a large decrease in costs has been observed along with the evolution of medical practices toward CPG compliance. This finding is probably generalizable to other settings, but there is nothing that proves that it is applicable to other treatment strategies.