Decision aids and shared decision making in urogynecology.

OBJECTIVES: To examine the efficacy and acceptability of decision aids (DAs) in counseling urogynecology patients with prolapse, stress urinary incontinence, or refractory overactive bladder. METHODS: This pilot study enrolled 33 patients into a control group that underwent usual care without a DA, followed by 33 patients into an intervention group where providers utilized a DA for counseling. Postvisit patient surveys assessed differences in treatment preference, knowledge, and in patient-physician collaboration using SURE, CollaboRATE, and Shared Decision Making (SDM) Process scales. Postvisit provider surveys assessed their perception of the usefulness and the difficulty of using a DA and visit length. Independent t tests were used for continuous variables (Knowledge and SDM Process scores) and Chi-Square for categorical variables (treatment preference, SURE, and CollaboRATE). RESULTS: The majority of eligible patients 66/71 (93%) completed the survey. The intervention group trended toward higher knowledge scores (72% vs 60%, P  = 0.06), clearer treatment preferences (85% vs 67%, P  = 0.08), higher rates of top SURE scale scores (91% vs 73%, P  = 0.11), and top CollaboRATE scores (75% vs 52%, P  = 0.07). SDM process scores were similar across groups (3.2 vs 3.2, P  = 0.96). Providers used the DA in 73% of intervention group visits and rated the visit length as "normal" in both groups (70% vs 76%, P  = 0.78). CONCLUSIONS: There were no statistically significant differences between the control group and the intervention group. The use of DAs was acceptable to providers and indicated a trend toward increased patient knowledge, treatment preference, and satisfaction. A larger study is warranted to examine the impact of DAs on decision making and patient experience.

Video Summary:http://links.lww.com/MENO/A856 .

Assessing the quality of shared decision making for elective orthopedic surgery across a large healthcare system: cross-sectional survey study.

BACKGROUND: Clinical guidelines recommend engaging patients in shared decision making for common orthopedic procedures; however, limited work has assessed what is occurring in practice. This study assessed the quality of shared decision making for elective hip and knee replacement and spine surgery at four network-affiliated hospitals. METHODS: A cross-sectional sample of 875 adult patients undergoing total hip or knee joint replacement (TJR) for osteoarthritis or spine surgery for lumbar herniated disc or lumbar spinal stenosis was selected. Patients were mailed a survey including measures of Shared Decision Making (SDMP scale) and Informed, Patient-Centered (IPC) decisions. We examined decision-making across sites, surgeons, and conditions, and whether the decision-making measures were associated with better health outcomes. Analyses were adjusted for clustering of patients within surgeons. RESULTS: Six hundred forty-six surveys (74% response rate) were returned with sufficient responses for analysis. Patients who had TJR reported lower SDMP scores than patients who had spine surgery (2.2 vs. 2.8; p < 0.001). Patients who had TJR were more likely to make IPC decisions (OA = 70%, Spine = 41%; p < 0.001). SDMP and IPC scores varied widely across surgeons, but the site was not predictive of SDMP scores or IPC decisions (all p > 0.09). Higher SDMP scores and IPC decisions were associated with larger improvements in global health outcomes for patients who had TJR, but not patients who had spine surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Measures of shared decision making and decision quality varied among patients undergoing common elective orthopedic procedures. Routine measurement of shared decision making provides insight into areas of strength across these different orthopedic conditions as well as areas in need of improvement.

Validation of an electronic coding algorithm to identify the primary indication of orthopedic surgeries from administrative data.

BACKGROUND: Determining the primary indication of a surgical procedure can be useful in identifying patients undergoing elective surgery where shared decision-making is recommended. The purpose of this study was to develop and validate an algorithm to identify patients receiving the following combinations of surgical procedure and primary indication as part of a study to promote shared decision-making: (1) knee arthroplasty to treat knee osteoarthritis (KOA); (2) hip arthroplasty to treat hip osteoarthritis (HOA); (3) spinal surgery to treat lumbar spinal stenosis (SpS); and (4) spinal surgery to treat lumbar herniated disc (HD). METHODS: Consecutive surgical procedures performed by participating spine, hip, and knee surgeons at four sites within an integrated care network were included. Study staff reviewed electronic medical records to ascertain a "gold standard" determination of the procedure and primary indication status. Electronic algorithms consisting of ICD-10 and CPT codes for each combination of procedure and indication were then applied to records for each case. The primary measures of validity for the algorithms were the sensitivity and specificity relative to the gold standard review. RESULTS: Participating surgeons performed 790 procedures included in this study. The sensitivity of the algorithms in determining whether a surgical case represented one of the combinations of procedure and primary indication ranged from 0.70 (HD) to 0.92 (KOA). The specificity ranged from 0.94 (SpS) to 0.99 (HOA, KOA). CONCLUSION: The electronic algorithm was able to identify all four procedure/primary indication combinations of interest with high specificity. Additionally, the sensitivity for the KOA cases was reasonably high. For HOA and the spine conditions, additional work is needed to improve the sensitivity of the algorithm to identify the primary indication for each case.

Comparing the effectiveness of two different decision aids for stable chest discomfort.

BACKGROUND: Decision aids (DAs) have been shown to increase decision quality in randomized controlled trials. This study compared the effectiveness of two different decision aids with different modes of delivery. PARTICIPANTS AND METHODS: Patients with angiogram-proven coronary artery disease (CAD) were eligible to participate and randomly assigned to either a booklet/DVD DA or an online DA. Participants completed a survey after viewing the material that assessed patients' knowledge, treatment preferences, use of and satisfaction with the tool, and open-ended reflections on the treatment decision-making process. RESULTS: Of the 62 patients screened, 34 agreed to participate and were randomly assigned to a group. Of those, 28 (15/17 booklet/DVD and 13/17 online) participants completed the survey. Patients were more likely to report reviewing all of the booklet/DVD DA compared with the online DA (60 vs. 31%, P=0.15). Knowledge scores were significantly higher in the booklet/DVD DA group than the online DA group (67 vs. 47%, P=0.018). Participants in both arms felt it was very or extremely important that doctors give patients materials like these before a catheterization (93% for booklet/DVD DA and 85% for online, P=0.54). Patients' qualitative feedback highlighted significant gaps in knowledge about treatment options, as well as a strong desire to have educational materials in advance of diagnostic catheterizations. CONCLUSION: The pilot study suggests that both decision aids are highly valued by patients with CAD. The booklet/DVD DA was associated with higher rates of complete review and improved knowledge about the management of stable coronary disease.

Content validation of the patient-reported outcomes measurement information system (PROMIS) framework in women with urinary incontinence.

AIMS: To assess whether the existing National Institutes of Health (NIH) Patient Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) conceptual framework and item banks sufficiently capture the concerns of women with urinary incontinence (UI). METHODS: Thirty-five women with UI were recruited between February-April 2009 for 4 structured focus groups to develop and assess the content validity of a conceptual framework for the impact of UI. This framework included domains from the NIH PROMIS framework and item banks including broad domains of physical and social function and mental health. All sessions were transcribed, coded, and qualitatively and quantitatively analyzed using analytic induction and deductive analysis to identify new themes and domains relevant to women with UI. RESULTS: The focus groups provided information that confirmed the relevance of existing PROMIS domains and identified new outcome domains that are important to this patient population. The groups confirmed the relevance of the physical and social functioning, and mental health domains. Additional themes that emerged included the distinction between ability versus participation and satisfaction, role functioning, external mediators, re-calibration/coping, cognitive function and new possibilities. Participants also felt strongly that not all domains and items apply to all women with UI and an option to tailor questionnaires and skip non-relevant items was important. CONCLUSIONS: The PROMIS framework domains are relevant to women with UI, but additional patient-important themes are identified that may improve the comprehensiveness of this assessment framework for measuring outcomes important to women with UI. These results will inform future item content development for UI.

Association between obesity, sexual activity and sexual function in women with pelvic floor disorders.

OBJECTIVES: : The objective of this study was to determine the association between obesity, sexual activity and sexual function in women with pelvic floor disorders (PFDs). METHODS: : A retrospective study of women seeking care for PFDs was conducted between May 2008 and May 2009. Obesity was defined as body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m. Outcomes included sexual activity and sexual function measured using the Pelvic Organ Prolapse/Urinary Incontinence Sexual Questionnaire-12 (PISQ-12). Multivariable regression was used to estimate the association between obesity and sexual inactivity and function. RESULTS: : There were 161 (45.5%) non-obese and 193 (54.5%) obese women, with a subset of 214 sexually active women. Obesity was not associated with sexual inactivity, but was associated with worse PISQ-12 scores compared with non-obese women (mean score 36.9 ± 38 versus 74.8 ± 34, P < 0.001). On multivariable linear regression, obese women had a mean score of 30 points lower (95% confidence interval -40.6 to -20.2, P < 0.001) on the PISQ-12 compared with non-obese women. CONCLUSIONS: : Obesity is associated with worse sexual function in women with PFDs.

Patient-reported outcomes after combined surgery for pelvic floor disorders in older compared to younger women.

OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to compare patient-reported outcomes after combined surgery for pelvic organ prolapse (POP) and stress urinary incontinence (SUI) between older and younger women. STUDY DESIGN: This was a retrospective cohort study including 122 younger (<65 years) and 70 older women (>/=65 years old) who underwent combined POP and SUI surgery. SUI and POP treatment failure were based on validated measures. Logistic regression was used to calculate adjusted odds ratios and 95% confidence interval [CI]. RESULTS: Mean follow-up was 10 +/- 1.2 months. Women in both age groups reported significant improvement in symptoms and life impact postoperatively. In multivariable analyses, older women had an increased odds of SUI treatment failure (adjusted odds ratio [AOR], 1.10; 95% CI, 1.05-2.5), but not POP treatment failure (AOR, 0.90; 95% CI, 0.29-2.8). CONCLUSION: Women 65 years and older undergoing combined surgery for POP and SUI are at risk for recurrent SUI, but still experience significant improvements in symptoms and life impact.