Integrating Patient Preferences with Guideline-Based Care in Neurogenic Lower Urinary Tract Dysfunction After Spinal Cord Injury.

Individual and social factors are important for clinical decision-making in patients with neurogenic bladder secondary to spinal cord injury (SCI). These factors include the availability of caregivers, social infrastructure, and personal preferences, which all can drive bladder management decisions. These elements can be overlooked in clinical decision-making; therefore, there is a need to elicit and prioritize patient preferences and values into neurogenic bladder care to facilitate personalized bladder management choices. For the purposes of this article, we review the role of guideline-based care and shared decision-making in the SCI population with neurogenic lower urinary tract dysfunction.

Patient versus physician preferences for lipid-lowering drug therapy: A discrete choice experiment.

BACKGROUND: The emergence of proprotein convertase subtilisin/kexin type 9 inhibitors offered dyslipidemia patients an alternative to statins for lipid-lowering treatment. Understanding patient and physician preferences for lipid-lowering drugs may promote shared decision-making and improve treatment outcomes. METHODS: This study utilized an online discrete choice experiment (DCE) to assess the relative importance (RI) of six attributes related to lipid-lowering drugs, including frequency of administration, mode of administration, reduction of low-density lipoprotein cholesterol (LDL-C) level, risk of myopathy, risk of liver damage, and out-of-pocket monthly cost. Respondents were recruited from dyslipidemia patients and cardiovascular physicians in China. A mixed logit model and latent class analysis were employed to estimate the preference coefficient, marginal willingness to pay (mWTP), and RI of attributes. Ethical approval has been obtained for this study. RESULTS: A total of 708 patients and 507 physicians participated in the survey. Patients prioritized the 'risk of liver damage' (RI = 23.6%) with 'mode of administration' (RI = 19.2%) and 'frequency of administration' (RI = 18.8%) following closely. Contrarily, physicians prioritized the 'reduction of LDL-C level' (RI = 33.5%), followed by 'risk of liver damage' (RI = 26.0%) and 'risk of myopathy' (RI = 16.1%). Patients placed a higher value on 'frequency of administration' (p < .001) and 'mode of administration' (p < .001) compared to physicians, while physicians valued 'reduction of LDL-C level' (p < .001) and 'risk of myopathy' (p = .012) more than patients. Physicians exhibited higher mWTP than patients for all attributes except frequency and mode of administration. The LCA revealed three distinct patient classes: focus on oral administration, focus on hepatic safety and frequency and focus on hepatic safety and cost. Likewise, three physician classes were identified: frequency-insensitive, efficacy-focused and safety-focused. CONCLUSIONS: The preferences for lipid-lowering drug therapy differed between patients and physicians in China. Physicians should take into account patients' preferences and provide personalized treatment when they formulate lipid-lowering treatment plans. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Patients participated in the questionnaire design process. They engaged in a focus group discussion to determine attributes and levels and also participated in a pilot survey to assess the comprehensibility of the questionnaires. Additionally, patients were involved in the DCE survey to express their preferences. The findings of patient preference for lipid-lowering drug therapy will promote shared decision-making and optimize the treatment regimen.

Patient preferences in genetic newborn screening for rare diseases: study protocol.

INTRODUCTION: Rare diseases (RDs) collectively impact over 30 million people in Europe. Most individual conditions have a low prevalence which has resulted in a lack of research and expertise in this field, especially regarding genetic newborn screening (gNBS). There is increasing recognition of the importance of incorporating patients' needs and general public perspectives into the shared decision-making process regarding gNBS. This study is part of the Innovative Medicine Initiative project Screen4Care which aims at shortening the diagnostic journey for RDs by accelerating diagnosis for patients living with RDs through gNBS and the use of digital technologies, such as artificial intelligence and machine learning. Our objective will be to assess expecting parent's perspectives, attitudes and preferences regarding gNBS for RDs in Italy and Germany. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: A mixed method approach will assess perspectives, attitudes and preferences of (1) expecting parents seeking genetic consultation and (2) 'healthy' expecting parents from the general population in two countries (Germany and Italy). Focus groups and interviews using the nominal group technique and ranking exercises will be performed (qualitative phase). The results will inform the treatment of attributes to be assessed via a survey and a discrete choice experiment (DCE). The total recruitment sample will be 2084 participants (approximatively 1000 participants in each country for the online survey). A combination of thematic qualitative and logit-based quantitative approaches will be used to analyse the results of the study. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study has been approved by the Erlangen University Ethics Committee (22-246_1-B), the Freiburg University Ethics Committee (23-1005 S1-AV) and clinical centres in Italy (University of FerraraCE: 357/2023/Oss/AOUFe and Hospedale Bambino Gesu: No.2997 of 2 November 2023, Prot. No. _902) and approved for data storage and handling at the Uppsala University (2022-05806-01). The dissemination of the results will be ensured via scientific journal publication (open access).

Measuring patients' medical treatment preferences in advance care planning: development and validation of the Treat-Me-ACP instrument - a secondary analysis of a cluster-randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Advance Care Planning interventions should be evaluated as broadly as possible to gain a holistic understanding of the Advance Care Planning process. However, validated early stage outcome instruments are lacking. Therefore, the Treatment-Preference-Measure-Advance Care Planning (Treat-Me-ACP) instrument was developed and validated as part of the cluster-randomized controlled trial STADPLAN (Study on Advance Care Planning in care-dependent community-dwelling older persons) to assess the effects of Advance Care Planning interventions on patients' medical treatment preferences. METHODS: The design of Treat-Me-ACP is based on the Emanuel Medical Directive and the Life Support Preferences Questionnaires. Using a multi-stage team approach a preliminary version of the Treat-Me-ACP was developed and pre-tested. The pre-tested instrument consists of one global medical care goal-item, five hypothetical scenarios with five hypothetical treatments, and one how would you feel-item within each scenario. A total of five scenario preference scores and five treatment preference scores can be formed. This version was subsequently applied to a subsample of the STADPLAN project (n = 80) to assess patient's preferences at baseline (T0) and at 12-month follow-up (T2). The further validation steps were based on this subsample and included: (1) acceptance by using completion rate and frequencies of missing data, (2) internal consistency by using Cronbach's α to test whether it was possible to create preference scores by scenario and treatment, (3) concurrent validation examining the association between the global medical care goal-item and the preference scores and the association between the how would you feel-items and the scenario preference scores, and (4) responsiveness of the instrument to changes in preferences for life-sustaining treatments by comparing preference scores from T0 to T2 between study groups. RESULTS: Acceptance of the instrument was high. Results of concurrent validation indicate that the five scenarios represent the global medical care goal well. The preference scores showed an average tendency for decreasing preferences for life-sustaining treatments across all scales for the intervention group during study follow-up. CONCLUSIONS: The Treat-Me-ACP can be used to evaluate the dynamics of patients' medical treatment preferences in Advance Care Planning. It has been validated for care-dependent community-dwelling older persons and can be used as an additional outcome measure in evaluating the effectiveness of ACP interventions. TRIAL REGISTRATION: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00016886 on 04/06/2019.

Patient Risk-Benefit Preferences for Transcatheter Versus Surgical Mitral Valve Repair.

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter edge-to-edge repair (TEER) of mitral regurgitation is less invasive than surgery but has greater 5-year mortality and reintervention risks, and leads to smaller improvements in physical functioning. The study objective was to quantify patient preferences for risk-benefit trade-offs associated with TEER and surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: A discrete choice experiment survey was administered to patients with mitral regurgitation. Attributes included procedure type; 30-day mortality risk; 5-year mortality risk and physical functioning for 5 years; number of hospitalizations in the next 5 years; and risk of additional surgery in the next 5 years. A mixed-logit regression model was fit to estimate preference weights. Two hundred one individuals completed the survey: 63% were female and mean age was 74 years. On average, respondents preferred TEER over surgery. To undergo a less invasive procedure (ie, TEER), respondents would accept up to a 13.3% (95% CI, 8.7%-18.5%) increase in reintervention risk above a baseline of 10%, 4.6 (95% CI, 3.1-6.2) more hospitalizations above a baseline of 1, a 10.7% (95% CI, 6.5%-14.5%) increase in 5-year mortality risk above a baseline of 20%, or more limited physical functioning representing nearly 1 New York Heart Association class (0.7 [95% CI, 0.4-1.1]) over 5 years. CONCLUSIONS: Patients in general preferred TEER over surgery. When holding constant all other factors, a functional improvement from New York Heart Association class III to class I maintained over 5 years would be needed, on average, for patients to prefer surgery over TEER.

Study protocol for a cross-sectional online survey investigating patient preferences and experiences of waiting for elective cardiac surgery.

INTRODUCTION: Being on a waiting list for elective (planned) cardiac surgery can be physically and psychologically challenging for patients. Research suggests that stress associated with waiting for surgery is dependent on different individual and contextual factors. However, most data on patients' experiences of waiting for surgery and preferences for waiting list management derives from non-cardiac clinical populations. The aim of the current study is to explore patients' experiences of being on a waiting list for elective cardiac surgery, and their views on how the waiting experience could be improved in the future. This work will inform the patient management strategy during the waiting period for surgery across the four major hospitals in London directly involved in this study, and potentially beyond by transferring learning to other services. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a mixed-methods study that will collect quantitative and qualitative data using a cross-sectional online survey. Patients who are on waiting lists for elective surgery across four major cardiac surgery departments in London hospitals, and are at least 18 years old, will be invited by their healthcare team via text message or letter to complete the survey. The target sample size of non-randomly selected participants will be 268. Bivariable and multivariable regression models will be used to assess associations between survey items measuring the impact of the cardiac condition on specific life domains (eg, daily activities, social and family relationships, hobbies, sexual life), anxiety and depression symptoms as measured by the Patient Health Questionnaire-4 and survey items evaluating experiences of health services. Data on experience and preferences for improvements to the waiting experience will be analysed with qualitative content analysis using an inductive approach. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: This study was reviewed and granted ethical approval by the East of England-East Cambridge Research Ethics Committee. Findings from this study will be disseminated through peer-reviewed journals, a research website and social media and with an online event engaging patients, members of the public, healthcare professionals and other relevant stakeholders. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMB: NCT05996640.

Non-insulin Medications for the Management of Type 2 Diabetes.

Type 2 diabetes (T2D) is predicted to affect 366 million people over the age of 65 years by the year 2030. As the understanding of the core defects associated with T2D advanced, researchers recognized management should target multiple defects in glucose metabolism. As a result, efforts to manage T2D focus on developing new drug therapies aimed at addressing each of the identified metabolic defects. Optimal treatment of T2D is necessary to decrease the risk for coronary heart disease, stroke, and vascular diseases. This article discusses non-insulin pharmacologic treatments for T2D that are guided by glycemic efficacy, safety profiles, effects on weight and hypoglycemia risk, tolerability, patient comorbidities, route of administration, patient preference, and cost.

HTA community perspectives on the use of patient preference information: lessons learned from a survey with members of HTA bodies.

This research sought to assess whether and how patient preference (PP) data are currently used within health technology assessment (HTA) bodies and affiliated organizations involved in technology/drug appraisals and assessments. An exploratory survey was developed by the PP Project Subcommittee of the HTA International Patient and Citizen Involvement Interest Group to gain insight into the use, impact, and role of PP data in HTA, as well as the perceived barriers to its incorporation. Forty members of HTA bodies and affiliated organizations from twelve countries completed the online survey. PP data were reported to be formally considered as part of the HTA evidence review process by 82.5 percent of the respondents, while 39.4 percent reported that most of the appraisals and assessments within their organization in the past year had submitted PP data. The leading reason for why PP data were not submitted in most assessments was time/resource constraints followed by lack of clarity on PP data impact. Participants reported that PP data had a moderate level of influence on the deliberative process and outcome of the decision, but a higher level of influence on the decision's quality. Most (81.8 percent) felt patient advocacy groups should be primarily responsible for generating and submitting this type of evidence. Insights from the survey confirm the use of PP data in HTA but reveal barriers to its broader and more meaningful integration. Encouragingly, participants believe obstacles can be overcome, paving the way for a second phase of research involving in-depth collaborative workshops with HTA representatives.

Prescriber decision-making on antithrombotic therapy after endovascular intervention for peripheral artery disease: a protocol for a discrete choice experiment.

INTRODUCTION: Peripheral artery disease (PAD) is a major risk factor for cardiovascular morbidity and mortality, despite surgical and endovascular treatments. Emerging evidence supports the use of immediate antithrombotic medications after endovascular intervention for PAD, however, there is a lack of consensus regarding choice and duration of antithrombotic therapy. Prescriber decision-making is a complex process, with prior studies demonstrating patient factors can influence variability in antithrombotic therapy for PAD. However, it remains unclear the relative contribution of these factors. This paper describes a planned study that aims to (1) determine the influence of patient factors on clinician preference for antithrombotic therapy following endovascular intervention and (2) compare differences in prescribing preferences between consultant vascular surgeons and trainees. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This cross-sectional survey will evaluate antithrombotic prescribing choices using a discrete choice experiment (DCE) that has been developed and piloted for this study. A list of attributes and levels was generated using a mixed-methods approach. This included an extensive literature review and semistructured interviews with prescribing clinicians. Following final selection of included attributes, specialised software was used to construct a D-efficient design for the DCE questionnaire. The electronic questionnaire will be administered to vascular trainees and consultant surgeons across Australia. These data will be analysed using multinomial logistic regression, treating the decision to prescribe antithrombotic therapy as a function of both the attributes of the two alternatives, as well as characteristics of the respondent. Latent class analysis will be used to explore heterogeneity of responses. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the University of Sydney Human Ethics committee (2023/474). The results of this study will be published in peer-reviewed journals and presented at national vascular surgical conferences. These results will be used to improve understanding how clinicians make prescribing decisions and to inform future strategy to enhance guideline-directed prescribing.

Physician factors affecting patient preferences in selecting a primary care provider: A qualitative research study in Singapore.

BACKGROUND: Care continuity by a dedicated, well-trained primary care physician (PCP) has shown to improve health outcomes of patients with non-communicable diseases (NCDs). In Singapore's fee-for-service primary care system, patients can choose to consult any PCP in either a public (polyclinic), private (General Practitioners/ GP), or both types of clinics, resulting in potential fragmented care. Decision-making by patients in selecting their preferred PCP remains unclear. This study aims to explore the personal factors influencing the choice of PCP among patients with NCDs in primary care. METHODS: This qualitative research study was conducted in a typical polyclinic. In-depth interviews were conducted on patients with NCDs. Purposive sampling was implemented to enrol patients who had previously consulted PCPs in polyclinics and GP clinics, garnering their perspectives and experiences of care received from both providers. Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed, and audited. Data was coded and analysed using thematic content analysis to identify emerging themes. The physician-specific factors which influence patients' decision-making of PCP selection are presented here. RESULTS: Twenty-one Asian patients aged 38 to 82 years were interviewed. They preferred PCPs with an approachable and genuine demeanour, exhibiting empathy and compassion. They valued the PCPs' verbal, non-verbal and listening skills. Regarding professional qualities, patients wanted PCPs to demonstrate competency and a patient-centred care approach. Some selected their PCP based on compatible age and gender that they felt comfortable with. Establishing good rapport with their PCP and maintaining continuity of care were deemed as major factors in patients' PCP selection. CONCLUSION: Patients tended to select PCPs based on their personal characteristics, interpersonal skills, professional attributes, demographics, and the physician-patient relationship. PCPs should be aware of these attributes and demonstrate them during their patient interaction. Leveraging on this enables PCPs to build rapport with their patients and maintain care continuity to optimize their health outcomes.

Treatment preferences of patients with erectile dysfunction: a systematic review of randomized controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: Patients' treatment preferences (PTP) depend on the complex interaction of numerous patient- and treatment-related factors; their assessment can guide therapy and promote compliance of patients with erectile dysfunction (ED). We aimed to systematically describe the literature evaluating the treatment preferences of patients with ED, published in the last 25 years. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: A comprehensive bibliographic search of multiple databases was conducted in June, 2023. The literature search was limited to the articles published since 1998. Articles were deemed eligible if they described male patients with ED (P) undergoing treatment for this condition (I) compared with other treatments, placebo or sham therapy (C), and reported PTP (O). Only randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and post-hoc analyses of RCTs were selected (S). The data were presented in a narrative fashion. The risk of bias (RoB) was evaluated using the RoB 2 tool and the Mulhall-Montorsi model. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: A total 14 RCTs evaluating 6,841 patients and 4 post-hoc analyses of RCTs were included. All RCTs were considered to be at high RoB. No validated tool was used to investigate PTP. Sildenafil was the most frequently evaluated ED treatment (9 RCTs). Sildenafil was chosen over placebo by 78-100% of subjects and over ICI in 70% of patients due to its easier route of administration. No significant difference in patient preference was recorded between Sildenafil tablets and orodispersible (53% vs. 47%, P>0.05). Tadalafil was preferred over Sildenafil by 66-73% of patients (P<0.05), mainly because it allowed an erection long after taking the drug (55-67%). Tadalafil as-needed was chosen over Tadalafil 3 times/week by 57-59% of the patients (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The available RCTs support the preference of ED patients for Sildenafil over ICI, Tadalafil over Sildenafil, and Tadalafil as-needed over Tadalafil 3 times/week. However, these findings should be considered at high RoB.

Patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) to personalise follow-up care of ovarian cancer: what do patients think? A qualitative interview study.

PURPOSE: The purpose of this study was to explore ovarian cancer patients' preferences regarding follow-up care and, in particular, the use of patient-reported outcome measures (PROMs) as an approach to personalise follow-up care. METHODS: Between May and June 2021, semi-structured interviews were conducted with ovarian cancer patients, who had finished their primary treatment at least 6 months prior and were receiving follow-up care at our centre. Interviews were transcribed verbatim and analysed using an inductive thematic approach. A thematic flow chart was created describing interacting themes. RESULTS: Seventeen patients were interviewed, of which 11 were familiar with PROMs. Two key themes emerged from the data: the need for reassurance and the wish for personalised care. A follow-up scheme using PROMs was identified as a separate theme with the potential to personalise care. Several barriers and facilitators of PROMs were mentioned. CONCLUSIONS: Ovarian cancer patients have a desire for personalised follow-up care and seek reassurance. PROMs may be able to support both of these needs. Future research is needed to determine the most effective, patient-centred way to implement them. IMPLICATIONS FOR CANCER SURVIVORS: By understanding what patients' preferences are regarding follow-up care, more initiatives can be set up to personalise follow-up care, through which patient anxiety and dissatisfaction can be reduced.

Quantifying preferences for urea cycle disorder treatments using a discrete choice experiment.

AIMS: Urea cycle disorders (UCDs) can cause ammonia accumulation and central nervous system toxicity. Nitrogen-binding medications can be efficacious, but certain attributes may negatively impact adherence. This study sought to quantify the administration-related attributes influencing overall prescription selection and patient adherence. METHODS: A web-based, quantitative survey including discrete choice experiment (DCE) methodology captured responses from health care providers for patients with UCDs. A series of hypothetical treatment profile sets with attributes such as route of administration, taste/odor, preparation instructions, packaging, dose measurement, and weight use restrictions were presented. From 16 sets of 3 hypothetical product profiles, respondents evaluated attributes most preferred for prescription selection or patient adherence. Attributes assumed a higher overall preference if relative importance (RI) scores were >16.67% (the value if all attributes were of equal importance). Preference weight scores were assessed. A nine-point Likert scale assessed respondent attitudes, such as satisfaction. RESULTS: A total of 51 respondents completed the survey. Respondents reported dissatisfaction with current treatments (mean [SD] = 5.4 [1.7]). For prescription selection, four attributes achieved RI >16.67%: taste/odor (24%), weight restrictions (21%), preparation instructions (18%), and route of administration (17%). For adherence, three attributes related to administration achieved RI >16.67%: taste/odor (28%), preparation instructions (21%), and route of administration (17%). Preference weights for "taste/odor masked" were higher than "not taste/odor masked" for prescription selection (mean [SD]; 1.52 [1.10] vs -1.52 [1.10]) and treatment adherence (73.8 [55.2] vs -73.8 [55.2]). LIMITATIONS: This study contained a relatively small sample size. Survey respondent selection, the use of hypothetical product profiles, and exclusion of non-pharmacologic treatment options could have contributed to potential biases. CONCLUSIONS: Among attributes tested, taste/odor was the most important attribute influencing overall preference for both prescribing and patient adherence, with taste/odor masking preferred. Optimizing nitrogen-binding medications through masking taste/odor may support improved patient adherence and outcomes in UCDs.

PREF-NET: a patient preference and experience study of lanreotide autogel administered in the home versus hospital setting among patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours in the UK.

PURPOSE: PREF-NET reported patients' experience of Somatuline® (lanreotide) Autogel® (LAN) administration at home and in hospital among patients with gastroenteropancreatic neuroendocrine tumours (GEP-NETs). METHODS: PREF-NET was a multicentre, cross-sectional study of UK adults (aged ≥ 18 years) with GEP-NETs receiving a stable dose of LAN, which comprised of (1) a quantitative online survey, and (2) qualitative semi-structured interviews conducted with a subgroup of survey respondents. The primary objective was the description of overall patient preference for home versus hospital administration of LAN. Secondary objectives included describing patient-reported opinions on the experience and associated preference for each administration setting, and the impact on healthcare utilisation, societal cost, activities of daily living and health-related quality of life (HRQoL). RESULTS: In the primary analysis (80 patients; mean age 63.9 years), 98.7% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 96.1-100.0) of patients preferred to receive LAN at home, compared with 1.3% (95% CI: 0.0-3.9) who preferred the hospital setting. Among participants, over half (60.3%) received their injection from a non-healthcare professional. Most patients (79.5% [95% CI: 70.5-88.4]) reported a positive effect on HRQoL after the switch from hospital to home administration. Qualitative interviews (20 patients; mean age 63.6 years) highlighted that patients preferred home administration because it improved overall convenience; saved time and costs; made them feel more comfortable and relaxed, and less stressed; and increased confidence in their ability to self-manage their treatment. CONCLUSION: Almost all patients preferred to receive LAN treatment at home rather than in hospital with increased convenience and psychological benefits reported as key reasons for this preference.

How does patient-centered communication influence patient trust?: The roles of patient participation and patient preference.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to examine the effects of patient-centered communication, patient participation, and patient preference on patient trust in the context of China. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was conducted involving 217 cancer patients in China. Mediation and moderation analyses were performed to examine the relationships among the study variables. RESULTS: First, patient-centered communication increased patient participation in decision-making, which, in turn, enhanced patient trust. Second, patient-centered communication did not have a direct effect on patient trust. Third, patient preference for a passive role in decision-making weakened the relationship between patient participation and patient trust. CONCLUSION: The results underscore the significant effect of facilitating patient participation in linking patient-centered communication to patient trust. However, medical communication should also respond to patients' preferred roles in the decision-making process. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Doctors should provide patients with opportunities to ask questions and express their concerns. In addition, they should evaluate patients' preferred degree of involvement before inviting them to contribute so as to respect their preferences and values.

What drives poor quality of care for child diarrhea? Experimental evidence from India.

Most health care providers in developing countries know that oral rehydration salts (ORS) are a lifesaving and inexpensive treatment for child diarrhea, yet few prescribe it. This know-do gap has puzzled experts for decades. Using randomized experiments in India, we estimated the extent to which ORS underprescription is driven by perceptions that patients do not want ORS, provider's financial incentives, and ORS stock-outs (out-of-stock events). Patients expressing a preference for ORS increased ORS prescribing by 27 percentage points. Eliminating stock-outs increased ORS provision by 7 percentage points. Removing financial incentives did not affect ORS prescribing on average but did increase ORS prescribing at pharmacies. We estimate that perceptions that patients do not want ORS explain 42% of underprescribing, whereas stock-outs and financial incentives explain only 6 and 5%, respectively.

Patient preferences in the treatment of stage III/IV classic Hodgkin lymphoma: Results from the CONNECT cross-sectional survey.

We explored patient front-line treatment preferences in newly diagnosed stage III/IV classic Hodgkin lymphoma (cHL). The CONNECT patient survey, administered online from 30 December 2020 to 1 March 2021, examined preferences overall and by age at diagnosis in 182 adult patients diagnosed with stage III/IV cHL within the past 10 years in the United States. At diagnosis, patients' median age was 36 years; 66% of patients were younger (aged 16-41 years) and 34% older (aged 42-85 years). When asked about initial treatment goals, 74% of patients ranked cure as their first or second goal (86% younger vs. 52% older patients; p < 0.001). At diagnosis, 72% of patients preferred aggressive treatment, and 85% were willing to accept more short-term risks in exchange for a better-working therapy long term. For long-term risks, younger versus older patients were significantly more concerned about second cancers (p < 0.001) and fertility issues (p = 0.007), whereas older patients were more concerned about lung damage (p = 0.028) and infections (p < 0.001). Most patients (94%) reported having a caregiver at some point, but 99% of these patients retained some control of treatment decisions. Collectively, these survey results highlight patient treatment preferences and differences in treatment goals and long-term side effect concerns based on patient age.

Experiences of treatment decision-making among older newly diagnosed adults with acute myeloid leukemia: a qualitative descriptive study.

PURPOSE: Treatment decision-making for older adults with acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is complex and preference-sensitive. We sought to understand the patient experience of treatment decision-making to identify specific challenges in shared decision-making to improve clinical care and to inform the development of directed interventions. METHODS: We conducted in-depth interviews with newly diagnosed older (≥ 60 years) adults with AML and their caregivers following a semi-structured interview guide at a public safety net academic hospital. Interviews were digitally recorded, and qualitative thematic analysis was employed to synthesize findings. RESULTS: Eighteen in-depth interviews were conducted. Age ranged from 62 to 78 years. Patients received intermediate- (50%) or high-intensity (44%) chemotherapy or best supportive care only (6%). Six themes of patient experiences emerged from the analysis: patients (1) felt overwhelmed and in shock at diagnosis, (2) felt powerless to make decisions, (3) felt rushed and unprepared to make a treatment decision, (4) desired to follow oncologist recommendations for treatment, (5) balanced multiple competing factors during treatment decision-making, and (6) desired for ongoing engagement into their care planning. Patients reported many treatment outcomes that were important in treatment decision-making. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults with newly diagnosed AML feel devastated and in shock at their diagnosis which appears to contribute to a feeling of being overwhelmed, unprepared, and rushed into treatment decisions. Because no one factor dominated treatment decision-making for all patients, the use of strategies to elicit individual patient preferences is critical to inform treatment decisions. Interventions are needed to reduce distress and increase a sense of participation in treatment decision-making.

Patient and physician decision-making dynamics in overactive bladder care: A mixed methods study.

AIMS: Overactive bladder management includes multiple therapeutic options with comparable efficacy but a range of administration modalities and side effects, creating an ideal setting for shared decision-making. This study investigates patient and physician health beliefs surrounding decision-making and expectations for overactive bladder with the aim of better understanding and ultimately improving decision-making in overactive bladder care. METHODS: Patient and physician participants completed a questionnaire followed by a semi-structured interview to assess health beliefs surrounding decision making and expectations for overactive bladder treatment. The semi-structured interview guide, developed in an iterative fashion by the authors, probed qualities of overactive bladder therapies patients and physicians valued, their process of treatment selection, and their experiences with therapies. RESULTS: Patients (n = 20) frequently cited treatment invasiveness, efficacy, and safety as the most important qualities that influenced their decision when selecting overactive bladder therapy. Physicians (n = 12) frequently cited safety/contraindications, convenience, cost/insurance, and patient preference as the most important qualities. In our integration analysis, we identified four key themes associated with decision making in overactive bladder care: frustration with inaccessibility of overactive bladder treatments, discordant perception of patient education, diverging acceptability of expected outcomes, and lack of insight into other parties' decisional priorities and control preferences. CONCLUSIONS: While both patients and physicians desire to engage in a shared decision-making process when selecting therapies for overactive bladder, this process is challenged by significant divergence between patient and physician viewpoint across key domains.