Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 20 de 31
Filter
1.
Transl Behav Med ; 13(10): 727-735, 2023 09 28.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37379519

ABSTRACT

We conducted a nationwide, randomized controlled trial to evaluate the impact of Healing Choices, a novel interactive education and treatment decision program rooted in the self-regulation theory framework, on decisional conflict and psychological distress at 2-month post-intervention in women with early-stage breast cancer. Patients were randomized to receive the National Cancer Institute's standard print material (control) or standard print material plus Healing Choices (the intervention). The final sample at 2-month post-intervention consisted of N = 388 participants (intervention: n = 197; control: n = 191). There were no significant differences in decisional conflict or its subscales; however, psychological distress was higher in the intervention group (16.09 ± 10.25) than in the control group (14.37 ± 8.73) at follow-up, B = 1.88, 95% CI [-0.03, 3.80], t(383) = 1.94, p = .05. Upon further examination, we found that engagement with the intervention was low-41%-prompting as-treated analyses, which showed no difference in distress between users and nonusers and a positive impact of Healing Choices on decisional conflict: decisional support subscale: users (35.36 ± 15.50) versus nonusers (39.67 ± 15.99), B = -4.31 (s.e. = 2.09), p = .04. Multiple recommendations for moving ahead stem from this work: (i) intent-to-treat analyses appeared to cause distress, cautioning against interventions that may lead to information overload; (ii) engagement with the intervention is low and future work needs to focus on increasing engagement and monitoring it throughout the study; and (iii) in studies with low engagement, as-treated analyses are critical.


Healing Choices is a multimedia software program that provides information and decision-making support for women with early-stage breast cancer. We present the results of a randomized controlled trial that evaluated the impact of Healing Choices, compared with standard of care (National Cancer Institute's standard print material), on decisional conflict and psychological distress. In total, 388 participants (197 in the intervention and 191 in the control group) completed the 2-month post-intervention assessment. Results indicated that Healing Choices did not help with treatment decision-making but was associated with higher levels of psychological distress. Use among women assigned to Healing Choices, however, was low, at 41%. When comparing women who used the program with those who did not, we found that the effect of elevated distress disappeared, while program users felt more support than nonusers during the decision-making process. In the future, interventions such as Healing Choices should be regulated so as not to cause distress via information overload, a focus on monitoring and increasing engagement with the intervention is necessary, and, when engagement is low, as-treated analyses are critical to explore the efficacy of the intervention.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Psychological Distress , Humans , Female , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Decision Making , Decision Support Techniques , Multimedia
2.
Med Decis Making ; 41(7): 954-959, 2021 10.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33966534

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: In 2014, a systematic review found large gaps in the quality of reporting of measures used in 86 published trials evaluating the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs). The purpose of this study was to update that review. METHODS: We examined measures of decision making used in 49 randomized controlled trials included in the 2014 and 2017 Cochrane Collaboration systematic review of PtDAs. Data on development of the measures, reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision, interpretability, feasibility, and acceptability were independently abstracted by 2 paired reviewers. RESULTS: Information from 273 measures was abstracted, and 109 of these covered the core domains of decision processes (n = 55) and decision quality including informed choice/knowledge (n = 48) and values-choice concordance (n = 12). Very few studies reported data on the performance and clinical sensibility of measures, with reliability (23%) and validity (6%) being the most common. Studies using new measures were less likely to include information about their psychometric performance compared with previously published measures. LIMITATIONS: The review was limited to reporting of measures in studies included in the Cochrane review and did not consult prior publications. CONCLUSION: There continues to be very little reported about the development or performance of measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of PtDAs in published trials. Minimum reporting standards have been published, and efforts to require investigators to use them are needed.


Subject(s)
Patient Participation , Quality Indicators, Health Care , Decision Support Techniques , Humans , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results
3.
Transl Behav Med ; 8(6): 876-886, 2018 11 21.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29982747

ABSTRACT

Men diagnosed with early stage prostate cancer face multiple treatment options, each with distinctive side effects that have significant implications for post-treatment quality of life. Healing Choices for Men with Prostate Cancer is a multimedia educational and decision aid program. This nation-wide randomized controlled trial evaluated the impact of Healing Choices on reducing decisional conflict and distress. Eligible prostate cancer patients who called the National Cancer Institute's Cancer Information Service (CIS) were invited to participate. After a baseline interview, participants were randomized to usual personalized consultation with a CIS specialist (comparison condition) or CIS personalized consultation plus the Healing Choices program (intervention condition). The Decision Conflict Scale and Impact of Event Scale assessed decisional conflict about prostate cancer treatment and cancer-related distress, respectively. Analyses evaluated group differences at 2 months postenrollment. Hypothesized moderation of intervention effects by demographic and clinical characteristics were evaluated. The final sample consisted of N = 349 participants (intervention: n = 181; comparison n = 168). Men were on average 64 years old, primarily White, and well educated. The difference in total decisional conflict was not significant (DCS total score; F[1,311] = .99, p = .32). The difference in cancer-related distress at 2 months between the intervention and the comparison groups was not significant (F[1,337] = .01, p = .93). Evaluation of specific decision processes indicated a significant effect on levels of perceived decisional support (intervention, M = 34.8, SD = 15.7; comparison, M = 38.3, SD = 16.1; F[1,337] = 3.74, p = .05). The intervention effect was greatest for nonwhite minority participants (b = -9.65, SE = 4.67) and those with lower educational attainment (b = 3.87, SE = 2.21). This interactive, comprehensive education and decision aid program may be most effective for a subset of prostate cancer patients in need of educational and decisional support.


Subject(s)
Decision Making , Decision Support Techniques , Multimedia , Outcome Assessment, Health Care , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Patient Preference , Prostatic Neoplasms/therapy , Aged , Humans , Male , Middle Aged
4.
BMJ Qual Saf ; 27(5): 389-412, 2018 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29467235

ABSTRACT

This Explanation and Elaboration (E&E) article expands on the 26 items in the Standards for UNiversal reporting of Decision Aid Evaluations guidelines. The E&E provides a rationale for each item and includes examples for how each item has been reported in published papers evaluating patient decision aids. The E&E focuses on items key to reporting studies evaluating patient decision aids and is intended to be illustrative rather than restrictive. Authors and reviewers may wish to use the E&E broadly to inform structuring of patient decision aid evaluation reports, or use it as a reference to obtain details about how to report individual checklist items.


Subject(s)
Checklist/standards , Decision Support Techniques , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , Patient Participation/methods , Delphi Technique , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Quality of Health Care
5.
BMJ Qual Saf ; 27(5): 380-388, 2018 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-29269567

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Patient decision aids (PDAs) are evidence-based tools designed to help patients make specific and deliberated choices among healthcare options. The International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) Collaboration review papers and Cochrane systematic review of PDAs have found significant gaps in the reporting of evaluations of PDAs, including poor or limited reporting of PDA content, development methods and delivery. This study sought to develop and reach consensus on reporting guidelines to improve the quality of publications evaluating PDAs. METHODS: An international workgroup, consisting of members from IPDAS Collaboration, followed established methods to develop reporting guidelines for PDA evaluation studies. This paper describes the results from three completed phases: (1) planning, (2) drafting and (3) consensus, which included a modified, two-stage, online international Delphi process. The work was conducted over 2 years with bimonthly conference calls and three in-person meetings. The workgroup used input from these phases to produce a final set of recommended items in the form of a checklist. RESULTS: The SUNDAE Checklist (Standards for UNiversal reporting of patient Decision Aid Evaluations) includes 26 items recommended for studies reporting evaluations of PDAs. In the two-stage Delphi process, 117/143 (82%) experts from 14 countries completed round 1 and 96/117 (82%) completed round 2. Respondents reached a high level of consensus on the importance of the items and indicated strong willingness to use the items when reporting PDA studies. CONCLUSION: The SUNDAE Checklist will help ensure that reports of PDA evaluation studies are understandable, transparent and of high quality. A separate Explanation and Elaboration publication provides additional details to support use of the checklist.


Subject(s)
Checklist/standards , Decision Support Techniques , Outcome Assessment, Health Care/standards , Patient Participation/methods , Delphi Technique , Humans , Practice Guidelines as Topic/standards , Quality of Health Care
6.
Internet Interv ; 2(4): 392-398, 2015 Nov 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26855885

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: Cancer patients and survivors are assuming active roles in decision-making and digital patient support tools are widely used to facilitate patient engagement. As part of Cancer Information Service Research Consortium's randomized controlled trials focused on the efficacy of eHealth interventions to promote informed treatment decision-making for newly diagnosed prostate and breast cancer patients, and post-treatment breast cancer, we conducted a rigorous process evaluation to examine the actual use of and perceived benefits of two complementary communication channels -- print and eHealth interventions. METHODS: The three Virtual Cancer Information Service (V-CIS) interventions were developed through a rigorous developmental process, guided by self-regulatory theory, informed decision-making frameworks, and health communications best practices. Control arm participants received NCI print materials; experimental arm participants received the additional V-CIS patient support tool. Actual usage data from the web-based V-CIS was also obtained and reported. RESULTS: Print materials were highly used by all groups. About 60% of the experimental group reported using the V-CIS. Those who did use the V-CIS rated it highly on improvements in knowledge, patient-provider communication and decision-making. CONCLUSION: The findings show that how patients actually use eHealth interventions either singularly or within the context of other communication channels is complex. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Integrating rigorous best practices and theoretical foundations is essential and multiple communication approaches should be considered to support patient preferences.

7.
Med Decis Making ; 34(5): 560-6, 2014 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24713692

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: This review systematically appraises the quality of reporting of measures used in trials to evaluate the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) and presents recommendations for minimum reporting standards. METHODS: We reviewed measures of decision quality and decision process in 86 randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration systematic review of PtDAs. Data on development of the measures, reliability, validity, responsiveness, precision, interpretability, feasibility, and acceptability were independently abstracted by 2 reviewers. RESULTS: Information from 178 instances of use of measures was abstracted. Very few studies reported data on the performance of measures, with reliability (21%) and validity (16%) being the most common. Studies using new measures were less likely to include information about their psychometric performance. The review was limited to reporting of measures in studies included in the Cochrane review and did not consult prior publications. CONCLUSIONS: Very little is reported about the development or performance of measures used to evaluate the effectiveness of PtDAs in published trials. Minimum reporting standards are proposed to enable authors to prepare study reports, editors and reviewers to evaluate submitted papers, and readers to appraise published studies.


Subject(s)
Decision Support Techniques , Patient Participation/methods , Research Design/standards , Data Accuracy , Humans , Psychometrics , Reproducibility of Results
8.
J Nurs Scholarsh ; 45(1): 96-104, 2013 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23368636

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: This article reports on recommendations arising from an invitational workshop series held at the National Institutes of Health for the purposes of identifying critical genomics problems important to the health of the public that can be addressed through nursing science. The overall purpose of the Genomic Nursing State of the Science Initiative is to establish a nursing research blueprint based on gaps in the evidence and expert evaluation of the current state of the science and through public comment. ORGANIZING CONSTRUCTS: A Genomic Nursing State of the Science Advisory Panel was convened in 2012 to develop the nursing research blueprint. The Advisory Panel, which met via two webinars and two in-person meetings, considered existing evidence from evidence reviews, testimony from key stakeholder groups, presentations from experts in research synthesis, and public comment. FINDINGS: The genomic nursing science blueprint arising from the Genomic Nursing State of Science Advisory Panel focuses on biologic plausibility studies as well as interventions likely to improve a variety of outcomes (e.g., clinical, economic, environmental). It also includes all care settings and diverse populations. The focus is on (a) the client, defined as person, family, community, or population; (b) the context, targeting informatics support systems, capacity building, education, and environmental influences; and (c) cross-cutting themes. It was agreed that building capacity to measure the impact of nursing actions on costs, quality, and outcomes of patient care is a strategic and scientific priority if findings are to be synthesized and aggregated to inform practice and policy. CONCLUSIONS: The genomic nursing science blueprint provides the framework for furthering genomic nursing science to improve health outcomes. This blueprint is an independent recommendation of the Advisory Panel with input from the public and is not a policy statement of the National Institutes of Health or the federal government. CLINICAL RELEVANCE: This genomic nursing science blueprint targets research to build the evidence base to inform integration of genomics into nursing practice and regulation (such as nursing licensure requirements, institutional accreditation, and academic nursing school accreditation).


Subject(s)
Evidence-Based Nursing , Genomics , Nursing Care , Nursing Research , Advisory Committees , Education, Nursing , Genome, Human , Humans , National Institutes of Health (U.S.) , United States
9.
Cancer Nurs ; 36(3): E33-8, 2013.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22964868

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Because of the significantly increased lifetime risk of ovarian cancer associated with inheritance of a germline mutation in the BRCA1/2 genes, women with a deleterious mutation are recommended to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy at age 35 years or once child-bearing is complete. Significant time is often spent by nurses trained in genetics providing counseling to improve the decision-making process. The decision to undergo surgery is complex and laden with several sources of uncertainty. OBJECTIVE: We conducted a qualitative study among female carriers of deleterious BRCA1/2 mutations to address these uncertainties. METHODS: Twelve qualitative interviews were conducted with women who had received a positive BRCA1/2 test result to explore their understanding of ovarian cancer risk, prevention options, and resource needs. Qualitative content analysis was performed. RESULTS: Significant information gaps in level of risk, other factors associated with ovarian cancer, and details of prophylactic oophorectomy were identified. Personal experience with cancer colored the degree of risk perception associated with the inherited mutation. Fear of the adverse effects of surgical menopause, both physiological and psychosocial, was common. Women expressed interest in hearing from other women facing the same decision. CONCLUSIONS: Women facing the decision to undergo risk-reducing salpingo-oophorectomy have several information gaps and unmet needs despite comprehensive counseling. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Based on our findings, we make specific recommendations that will guide nursing practice and future research.


Subject(s)
Genes, BRCA1 , Needs Assessment , Ovarian Neoplasms/nursing , Ovariectomy , Salpingectomy , Adult , Biomarkers/metabolism , Female , Genetic Predisposition to Disease , Humans , Middle Aged , Mutation , Ovarian Neoplasms/genetics , Ovarian Neoplasms/prevention & control , Ovariectomy/nursing , Risk Factors , Risk Reduction Behavior , Salpingectomy/nursing , Sampling Studies
10.
Oncol Nurs Forum ; 40(1): E24-31, 2013 Jan.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-23269778

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To examine the feasibility and acceptability of using a decision aid with an interactive decision-making process in patients with solid tumors and their caregivers during cancer-related treatment. RESEARCH APPROACH: A phenomenologic approach was used to analyze qualitative data, with a focus on the meaning of participants' lived experiences. Interviews were conducted by telephone or in person. SETTING: Outpatient clinics at two regional cancer centers. PARTICIPANTS: 160 total individuals; 80 patients with newly diagnosed breast (n = 22), advanced-stage prostate (n = 19), or advanced-stage lung (n = 39) cancer, and their caregivers (n = 80). METHODOLOGIC APPROACH: Twenty-seven of the 80 pairs engaged in audio recorded interviews that were conducted using a semistructured interview guide. Continuous text immersion revealed themes. Validity of qualitative analysis was achieved by member checking. FINDINGS: Significant findings included three themes: (a) the decision aid helped patients and caregivers understand treatment decisions better, (b) the decision aid helped patients and caregivers to be more involved in treatment decisions, and (c) frequent contact with the study nurse was valuable. CONCLUSIONS: Decision making was more complex than participants expected. The decision aid helped patients and caregivers make satisfying treatment decisions and become integral in a shared treatment decision-making process. INTERPRETATION: Decision aids can help patients and their caregivers make difficult treatment decisions affecting quantity and quality of life during cancer treatment. The findings provide valuable information for healthcare providers helping patients and their caregivers make treatment decisions through a shared, informed, decision-making process. KNOWLEDGE TRANSLATION: Decision aids can be helpful with treatment choices. Caregivers' understanding about treatment is just as important in the decision-making process as the patients' understanding. Incorporating decision aids that are delivered by healthcare providers or trained personnel has the potential to improve patients' decision satisfaction.


Subject(s)
Caregivers/psychology , Decision Making , Neoplasms/nursing , Neoplasms/psychology , Oncology Nursing/methods , Adult , Aged , Breast Neoplasms/nursing , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Feasibility Studies , Female , Humans , Interviews as Topic , Lung Neoplasms/nursing , Lung Neoplasms/psychology , Male , Nurse-Patient Relations , Nursing Methodology Research , Outpatients/psychology , Patient Participation/psychology , Prostatic Neoplasms/nursing , Prostatic Neoplasms/psychology
11.
Cancer Nurs ; 36(2): 163-72, 2013.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22495504

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Many young women have turned to illness blogs to describe their lived experience with cancer. Blogs represent an untapped source of knowledge for researchers and clinicians. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this qualitative, exploratory study was to describe the life disruptions caused by cancer among young women, as well as to understand the facilitators and barriers in accessing healthcare services during and after active treatment. METHODS: Sixteen Internet illness blogs were analyzed among women, aged between 20 and 39 years, diagnosed with cancer. These blogs were analyzed based on phenomenological qualitative methods and thematic analysis. RESULTS: There were 4 dimensions of persistent problems that were articulated in the narratives of the young women without any relief. They included pain and fatigue, insurance and financial barriers, concerns related to fertility, and symptoms of posttraumatic stress and anxiety. CONCLUSION: The young women's narratives capture fear, uncertainty, anger, and the debilitating nature of these persistent issues. Many of the women expressed their lingering physical, psychosocial, and emotional problems. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Online illness narratives are a naturalistic form of inquiry that allows nurses to understand the experience of the patient through their own words and accounts. This study provides a foundation for nursing-based interventions that transcend traditional clinic experiences.


Subject(s)
Blogging , Breast Neoplasms/nursing , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/nursing , Carcinoma, Lobular/nursing , Adult , Anxiety/nursing , Breast Neoplasms/complications , Breast Neoplasms/economics , Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/complications , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/economics , Carcinoma, Intraductal, Noninfiltrating/psychology , Carcinoma, Lobular/complications , Carcinoma, Lobular/economics , Carcinoma, Lobular/psychology , Fatigue/etiology , Female , Fertility , Financial Management , Humans , Insurance, Health , Pain/etiology , Stress, Psychological/nursing , Virginia
12.
BMC Med Inform Decis Mak ; 13 Suppl 2: S12, 2013.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-24625035

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Establishing the effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDA) requires evidence that PtDAs improve the quality of the decision-making process and the quality of the choice made, or decision quality. The aim of this paper is to review the theoretical and empirical evidence for PtDA effectiveness and discuss emerging practical and research issues in the measurement of effectiveness. METHODS: This updated overview incorporates: a) an examination of the instruments used to measure five key decision-making process constructs (i.e., recognize decision, feel informed about options and outcomes, feel clear about goals and preferences, discuss goals and preferences with health care provider, and be involved in decisions) and decision quality constructs (i.e., knowledge, realistic expectations, values-choice agreement) within the 86 trials in the Cochrane review; and b) a summary of the 2011 Cochrane Collaboration's review of PtDAs for these key constructs. Data on the constructs and instruments used were extracted independently by two authors from the 86 trials and any disagreements were resolved by discussion, with adjudication by a third party where required. RESULTS: The 86 studies provide considerable evidence that PtDAs improve the decision-making process and decision quality. A majority of the studies (76/86; 88%) measured at least one of the key decision-making process or decision quality constructs. Seventeen different measurement instruments were used to measure decision-making process constructs, but no single instrument covered all five constructs. The Decisional Conflict Scale was most commonly used (n = 47), followed by the Control Preference Scale (n = 9). Many studies reported one or more constructs of decision quality, including knowledge (n = 59), realistic expectation of risks and benefits (n = 21), and values-choice agreement (n = 13). There was considerable variability in how values-choice agreement was defined and determined. No study reported on all key decision-making process and decision quality constructs. CONCLUSIONS: Evidence of PtDA effectiveness in improving the quality of the decision-making process and decision quality is strong and growing. There is not, however, consensus or standardization of measurement for either the decision-making process or decision quality. Additional work is needed to develop and evaluate measurement instruments and further explore theoretical issues to advance future research on PtDA effectiveness.


Subject(s)
Decision Support Techniques , Health Services Research , Patient Participation , Cooperative Behavior , Decision Making , Health Personnel , Humans
13.
Patient Educ Couns ; 88(2): 344-9, 2012 Aug.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-22770812

ABSTRACT

OBJECTIVE: This paper describes the development of a theory-guided and evidence-based multimedia training module to facilitate breast cancer survivors' preparedness for effective communication with their health care providers after active treatment. METHODS: The iterative developmental process used included: (1) theory and evidence-based content development and vetting; (2) user testing; (3) usability testing; and (4) participant module utilization. RESULTS: Formative evaluation of the training module prototype occurred through user testing (n = 12), resulting in modification of the content and layout. Usability testing (n = 10) was employed to improve module functionality. Preliminary web usage data (n = 256, mean age = 53, 94.5% White, 75% college graduate and above) showed that 59% of the participants accessed the communication module, for an average of 7 min per login. CONCLUSION: The iterative developmental process was informative in enhancing the relevance of the communication module. Preliminary web usage results demonstrate the potential feasibility of such a program. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Our study demonstrates survivors' openness to the use of a web-based communication skills training module and outlines a systematic iterative user and interface program development and testing process, which can serve as a prototype for others considering such an approach.


Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms/psychology , Communication , Multimedia/statistics & numerical data , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Professional-Family Relations , Survivors/psychology , Adult , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Computers , Female , Humans , Internet , Middle Aged , Patient Satisfaction , Patient Selection , Program Development , Socioeconomic Factors , Survival Rate
15.
J Clin Oncol ; 28(18): 3090-5, 2010 Jun 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20458026

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: Women at high risk of breast cancer face the complex decision of whether to take tamoxifen or raloxifene for breast cancer chemoprevention. We investigated what is known about decisions of women regarding chemoprevention. METHODS: Using MEDLINE, CINAHL, and PSYCINFO, plus reviewing reference lists of relevant articles, in December 2009 we identified 13 studies that addressed patient decisions about breast cancer chemoprevention, were published in 1995 or later, were peer-reviewed primary clinical studies, and reported rates at which participants showed interest in (hypothetical uptake) or accepted (real uptake) chemoprevention medications. RESULTS: Nine studies provided information about hypothetical breast cancer chemoprevention decisions (mean uptake rate, 24.7%) and five provided information about real decisions (mean uptake rate, 14.8%). The range of rates was wide, and each of the hypothetical uptake studies assessed interest differently. A logistic regression model found significant correlation with uptake of decision type (hypothetical versus real, odds ratio [OR] = 1.65; 95% CI, 1.26 to 2.16), educational or decision support intervention (provided v not, OR = 0.21; 95% CI, 0.17 to 0.27), and cohort risk for breast cancer (high-risk v general population, OR = 0.65; 95% CI, 0.56 to 0.75). Perceived vulnerability to breast cancer was consistently correlated with increased uptake, and concern for adverse effects was correlated with reduced uptake. All studies used a correlational/descriptive design, and most studies used convenience sampling strategies. CONCLUSION: Breast cancer chemoprevention uptake rates are low and variation is wide. Hypothetical uptake rates are higher than real uptake, and interventions markedly reduce uptake. Research is needed that uses reproducible sampling methods and examines decision support strategies that lead to quality decisions.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Decision Making , Health Knowledge, Attitudes, Practice , Female , Humans , Meta-Analysis as Topic
16.
Qual Life Res ; 19(10): 1429-37, 2010 Dec.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-20419396

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE: In quality-of-life (QL) research, the genetic susceptibility of negative and positive emotions is frequently ignored, taken for granted, or treated as noise. The objectives are to describe: (1) the major findings of studies addressing the heritable and environmental causes of variation in negative and positive emotional states and (2) the major biological pathways of and genetic variants involved in these emotional states. METHODS: Literature overview. RESULTS: The heritability estimates for anxiety and depression are 30-40%. Related traits as neuroticism and loneliness are also highly heritable. The hypothalamo-pituitary-adrenal axis is the 'final common pathway' for most depressive symptoms. The many findings of investigated genes are promising but not definitive. Heritability estimates of positive emotional states range between 40 and 50%. Life satisfaction and mental health share common genetic factors with optimism and self-esteem. The prefrontal cortex is a candidate brain area for positive emotional states. Biological and genetic research into positive emotional states is scarce. CONCLUSION: Genetically informative studies may provide insights into a wide variety of complex questions that traditional QL studies cannot deliver. This insight in turn will help us to design more effective supportive programs that could moderate the outcomes of genetically based predispositions.


Subject(s)
Emotions , Personal Satisfaction , Personality/genetics , Quality of Life/psychology , Depressive Disorder/genetics , Depressive Disorder/physiopathology , Emotions/physiology , Happiness , Humans , Hypothalamo-Hypophyseal System , Personality/physiology , Pituitary-Adrenal System , Self Concept
17.
Twin Res Hum Genet ; 12(3): 301-11, 2009 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19456223

ABSTRACT

To our knowledge, no comprehensive, interdisciplinary initiatives have been taken to examine the role of genetic variants on patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes. The overall objective of this paper is to describe the establishment of an international and interdisciplinary consortium, the GENEQOL Consortium, which intends to investigate the genetic disposition of patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes. We have identified five primary patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes as initial targets: negative psychological affect, positive psychological affect, self-rated physical health, pain, and fatigue. The first tangible objective of the GENEQOL Consortium is to develop a list of potential biological pathways, genes and genetic variants involved in these quality-of-life outcomes, by reviewing current genetic knowledge. The second objective is to design a research agenda to investigate and validate those genes and genetic variants of patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes, by creating large datasets. During its first meeting, the Consortium has discussed draft summary documents addressing these questions for each patient-reported quality-of-life outcome. A summary of the primary pathways and robust findings of the genetic variants involved is presented here. The research agenda outlines possible research objectives and approaches to examine these and new quality-of-life domains. Intriguing questions arising from this endeavor are discussed. Insight into the genetic versus environmental components of patient-reported quality-of-life outcomes will ultimately allow us to explore new pathways for improving patient care. If we can identify patients who are susceptible to poor quality of life, we will be able to better target specific clinical interventions to enhance their quality of life and treatment outcomes.


Subject(s)
Genetic Predisposition to Disease/psychology , Quality of Life/psychology , Genetic Variation , Health Status , Humans , Research Design
18.
J Clin Oncol ; 27(19): 3235-58, 2009 Jul 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-19470930

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE To update the 2002 American Society of Clinical Oncology guideline on pharmacologic interventions for breast cancer (BC) risk reduction. METHODS A literature search identified relevant randomized trials published since 2002. Primary outcome of interest was BC incidence (invasive and noninvasive). Secondary outcomes included BC mortality, adverse events, and net health benefits. An expert panel reviewed the literature and developed updated consensus guidelines. Results Seventeen articles met inclusion criteria. In premenopausal women, tamoxifen for 5 years reduces the risk of BC for at least 10 years, particularly estrogen receptor (ER) -positive invasive tumors. Women < or = 50 years of age experience fewer serious side effects. Vascular and vasomotor events do not persist post-treatment across all ages. In postmenopausal women, raloxifene and tamoxifen reduce the risk of ER-positive invasive BC with equal efficacy. Raloxifene is associated with a lower risk of thromboembolic disease, benign uterine conditions, and cataracts than tamoxifen in postmenopausal women. No evidence exists establishing whether a reduction in BC risk from either agent translates into reduced BC mortality. Recommendations In women at increased risk for BC, tamoxifen (20 mg/d for 5 years) may be offered to reduce the risk of invasive ER-positive BC, with benefits for at least 10 years. In postmenopausal women, raloxifene (60 mg/d for 5 years) may also be considered. Use of aromatase inhibitors, fenretinide, or other selective estrogen receptor modulators to lower BC risk is not recommended outside of a clinical trial. Discussion of risks and benefits of preventive agents by health providers is critical to patient decision making.


Subject(s)
Antineoplastic Agents, Hormonal/therapeutic use , Aromatase Inhibitors/therapeutic use , Breast Neoplasms/prevention & control , Raloxifene Hydrochloride/therapeutic use , Selective Estrogen Receptor Modulators/therapeutic use , Tamoxifen/therapeutic use , Female , Humans , Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic , Risk Factors
19.
J Genet Couns ; 17(2): 196-207, 2008 Apr.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-18224431

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: As familial cancer genetic services moves into community practice increased numbers of trained health professionals are needed to counsel individuals seeking cancer risk information. Nurses have been targeted to provide cancer risk assessment and counseling. To help prepare nurses for this role, a 5-day training in familial cancer risk assessment and counseling followed by a long-distance mentorship to support continued skill development in the work environment was conducted by Fox Chase Cancer Center, Philadelphia, PA. METHODS: Four cohorts (N = 41) have completed the training and were randomized to either an immediate or delayed mentorship. A formative evaluation assessed the nurse's ability to consult with other genetic health professionals and build self-efficacy in counseling skills via responses to questionnaire. A post-mentorship interview evaluated the usefulness, timing and length of the mentorship. RESULTS: For both groups, there was a statistically significant improvement in self-efficacy for all skills from baseline to 6 months and an increased number of nurses consulting with genetic health professionals. All the nurses reported the value of the mentorship and those with less cancer risk counseling experience prior to the training needed support and resources for further skill and program development. Lessons learned from this formative evaluation are provided.


Subject(s)
Education, Nursing, Continuing , Genetic Counseling , Genetic Testing , Genetics, Medical/education , Mentors , Neoplasms/genetics , Neoplasms/nursing , Cancer Care Facilities , Curriculum , Follow-Up Studies , Humans , Inservice Training , Models, Educational , Philadelphia , Program Evaluation , Risk Assessment
20.
Oncol Nurs Forum ; 34(2): 403-9, 2007 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-17573304

ABSTRACT

PURPOSE/OBJECTIVES: To examine how neutropenia affects quality of life (QOL) and explore strategies to assess neutropenia-related QOL in clinical practice. DATA SOURCES: Published articles, abstracts, conference proceedings, and clinical practice guidelines. DATA SYNTHESIS: Neutropenia can have a detrimental effect on the QOL of patients receiving chemotherapy. A neutropenia-related QOL questionnaire can help nurses better identify patients at risk for developing neutropenia and monitor patients who already have it. In some cases, the questionnaire may be the first step in the initiation of interventions to improve patient care. Ideally, the QOL questionnaire should be easy to use, provide clinically meaningful information, and be easily adapted from existing QOL measurement tools. CONCLUSIONS: Effective implementation of QOL assessments into clinical practice can lead to the initiation of interventions that may improve neutropenia-related QOL in patients with cancer receiving chemotherapy. IMPLICATIONS FOR NURSING: Nurses can enhance their clinical judgment and affect patient treatment by implementing a questionnaire that assesses patients' neutropenia-related QOL.


Subject(s)
Neutropenia/nursing , Nursing Assessment/methods , Oncology Nursing/methods , Quality of Life , Humans , Oncology Nursing/instrumentation , Surveys and Questionnaires
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...