Randomized Trial of Information for Older Women About Cessation of Breast Cancer Screening Invitations.

BACKGROUND: Older women receive no information about why Australia's breast screening program (BreastScreen) invitations cease after 74 years. We tested how providing older women with the rationale for breast screening cessation impacted informed choice (adequate knowledge; screening attitudes aligned with intention). METHODS: In a three-arm online randomized trial, eligible participants were females aged 70-74 years who had recently participated in breast screening (within 5 years), without personal breast cancer history, recruited through Qualtrics. Participants read a hypothetical scenario in which they received a BreastScreen letter reporting no abnormalities on their mammogram. They were randomized to receive the letter: (1) without any rationale for screening cessation (control); (2) with screening cessation rationale in printed-text form (e.g., downsides of screening outweigh the benefits after age 74); or (3) with screening cessation rationale presented in an animation video form. The primary outcome was informed choice about continuing/stopping breast screening beyond 74 years. RESULTS: A total of 376 participant responses were analyzed. Compared to controls (n = 122), intervention arm participants (text [n = 132] or animation [n = 122]) were more likely to make an informed choice (control 18.0%; text 32.6%, p = .010; animation 40.5%, p < .001). Intervention arm participants had more adequate knowledge (control 23.8%; text 59.8%, p < .001; animation 68.9%, p < .001), lower screening intentions (control 17.2%; text 36.4%, p < .001; animation 49.2%, p < .001), and fewer positive screening attitudes regarding screening for themselves in the animation arm, but not in the text arm (control 65.6%; text 51.5%, p = .023; animation 40.2%, p < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Providing information to older women about the rationale for breast cancer screening cessation increased informed decision-making in a hypothetical scenario. This study is an important first step in improving messaging provided by national cancer screening providers direct to older adults. Further research is needed to assess the impact of different elements of the intervention and the impact of providing this information in clinical practice, with more diverse samples. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ANZCTRN12623000033640.

Harm and Medication-Type Impact Agreement with Hypothetical Deprescribing Recommendations: a Vignette-Based Experiment with Older Adults Across Four Countries.

BACKGROUND: Little is known about what factors are important to older adults when deciding whether to agree with a recommendation to deprescribe. OBJECTIVE: To explore the extent to which medication type and rationale for potential discontinuation influence older adults' acceptance of deprescribing. DESIGN: Cross-sectional 2 (drug: lansoprazole - treat indigestion; simvastatin - prevent cardiovascular disease) by 3 (deprescribing rationale: lack of benefit; potential for harm; both) experimental design. PARTICIPANTS: Online panelists aged ≥65 years from Australia, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom, and the United States INTERVENTIONS: Participants were presented with a hypothetical patient experiencing polypharmacy whose PCP discussed stopping a medication. We randomized participants to receive one of six vignettes. MAIN MEASURES: We measured agreement with deprescribing (6-point Likert scale, "Strongly disagree (1)" and "Strongly agree (6)") for the hypothetical patient as the primary outcome. We also measured participants' personality traits, perceptions of risk and uncertainty, and attitudes towards polypharmacy and deprescribing. KEY RESULTS: Among 5311 participants (93.3% completion rate), the mean (M) agreement with deprescribing for the hypothetical patient was 4.71 (95% confidence interval (CI): 4.67, 4.75). Participants reported higher agreement with stopping lansoprazole (n=2656) (M=4.90, 95% CI: 4.85, 4.95) compared to simvastatin (n=2655) (M=4.53, 95% CI: 4.47, 4.58), P<.001. Participants who received the combination rationale (n=1786) reported higher agreement with deprescribing (M=4.83, 95% CI: 4.76, 4.89) compared to those who received the rationales on lack of benefit (n=1755) (M=4.66, 95% CI: 4.60, 4.73) or potential for harm (n=1770) (M=4.65, 95% CI 4.58, 4.72). In adjusted regression analyses (n=5062), participants with a higher desire to engage in health promotion behaviors (b=0.08, 95% CI 0.02, 0.13) or need for certainty (b=0.12, 95% CI 0.04, 0.20) reported higher agreement with deprescribing. CONCLUSIONS: Older adults across four countries were accepting of deprescribing in the setting of polypharmacy. The medication type and rationale for discontinuation were important factors in the decision-making process. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT04676282, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04676282?term=vordenberg&draw=2&rank=1.

Factors Influencing Primary Care Practitioners' Cancer Screening Recommendations for Older Adults: a Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Primary care practitioners (PCPs) play a key role in cancer screening decisions for older adults (≥ 65 years), but recommendations vary by cancer type and jurisdiction. PURPOSE: To examine the factors influencing PCPs' recommendations for breast, cervical, prostate, and colorectal cancer screening for older adults. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Pre-Medline, EMBASE, PsycINFO, and CINAHL, searched from 1 January 2000 to July 2021, and citation searching in July 2022. STUDY SELECTION: Assessed factors influencing PCPs' breast, prostate, colorectal, or cervical cancer screening decisions for older adults' (defined either as ≥ 65 years or < 10-year life expectancy). DATA EXTRACTION: Two authors independently conducted data extraction and quality appraisal. Decisions were crosschecked and discussed where necessary. DATA SYNTHESIS: From 1926 records, 30 studies met inclusion criteria. Twenty were quantitative, nine were qualitative, and one used a mixed method design. Twenty-nine were conducted in the USA, and one in the UK. Factors were synthesized into six categories: patient demographic characteristics, patient health characteristics, patient and clinician psycho-social factors, clinician characteristics, and health system factors. Patient preference was most reported as influential across both quantitative and qualitative studies. Age, health status, and life expectancy were also commonly influential, but PCPs held nuanced views about life expectancy. Weighing benefits/harms was also commonly reported with variation across cancer screening types. Other factors included patient screening history, clinician attitudes/personal experiences, patient/provider relationship, guidelines, reminders, and time. LIMITATIONS: We could not conduct a meta-analysis due to variability in study designs and measurement. The vast majority of included studies were conducted in the USA. CONCLUSIONS: Although PCPs play a role in individualizing cancer screening for older adults, multi-level interventions are needed to improve these decisions. Decision support should continue to be developed and implemented to support informed choice for older adults and assist PCPs to consistently provide evidence-based recommendations. REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42021268219. FUNDING SOURCE: NHMRC APP1113532.

Screening for cancer beyond recommended upper age limits: views and experiences of older people.

BACKGROUND: Internationally, screening programmes and clinical practice guidelines recommend when older adults should stop cancer screening using upper age limits, but it is unknown how older adults view these recommendations. OBJECTIVE: To examine older adults' views and experiences about continuing or stopping cancer screening beyond the recommended upper age limit for breast, cervical, prostate and bowel cancer. DESIGN: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews. SETTING: Australia, telephone. SUBJECTS: A total of 29 community-dwelling older adults (≥70-years); recruited from organisation newsletters, mailing lists and Facebook advertisements. METHODS: Interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and analysed thematically using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: Firstly, older adults were on a spectrum between trusting recommendations and actively deciding about cancer screening, with some who were uncertain. Secondly, participants reported limited in-depth discussions with health professionals about cancer screening. In primary care, discussions were focused on checking they were up to date with screening or going over results. Discussions mostly only occurred if older adults initiated themselves. Finally, participants had a socially- and self-constructed understanding of screening recommendations and potential outcomes. Perceived reasons for upper age limits were cost, reduced cancer risk or ageism. Risks of screening were understood in relation to their own social experiences (e.g. shared stories about friends with adverse outcomes of cancer treatment or conversations with friends/family about controversy around prostate screening). CONCLUSIONS: Direct-to-patient information and clinician support may help improve communication about the changing benefit to harm ratio of cancer screening with increasing age and increase understanding about the rationale for an upper age limit for cancer screening programmes.

The impact of health literacy on psychosocial and behavioural outcomes among people at low risk of cardiovascular disease.

This study aimed to explore the impact of health literacy on psychosocial and behavioural outcomes for people who were not at high risk of cardiovascular disease receiving a hypothetical blood pressure reading of 135/85 mmHg. We performed a secondary analysis of data from a national sample of Australians aged 40 to 50 years (n = 1318) recruited online. Health literacy was measured using the validated Newest Vital Sign (inadequate: 0-3; adequate: 4-6). Analysed outcomes included: willingness to increase exercise and accept medication; perceived severity; positive and negative affect; illness perceptions and impacts on life and motivation. Participants with inadequate levels of health literacy perceived a blood pressure reading of 135/85 mmHg to be less serious compared to individuals with adequate health literacy (Mean Difference [MD]:0.21; 95%CI 0.03-0.39; p = .024; d = 0.13), and reported less motivation to eat well (MD:0.44; 95%CI 0.31-0.58; p < .001; d = 0.38) and exercise (MD:0.43; 95%CI 0.31-0.58; p < .001; d = 0.36). However, they were more willing to accept medication (MD:0.20; 95%CI 0.07-0.34; p = .004; d = 0.17). Participants with inadequate health literacy also perceived the condition to have fewer negative impacts on aspects of life and work than individuals with adequate health literacy, but reported greater negative emotion and more negative illness perceptions (all p < .001). Tailored communication and behaviour change support may be needed when communicating blood pressure information to people with lower health literacy and not at high risk of cardiovascular disease given the differential impacts on medication (increased willingness) and healthy exercise and diet behaviours (decreased willingness) observed in this study.

Interventions for improving health literacy in people with chronic kidney disease.

BACKGROUND: Low health literacy affects 25% of people with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and is associated with increased morbidity and death. Improving health literacy is a recognised priority, but effective interventions are not clear. OBJECTIVES: This review looked the benefits and harms of interventions for improving health literacy in people with CKD. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Kidney and Transplant Register of Studies up to 12 July 2022 through contact with the Information Specialist using search terms relevant to this review. Studies in the Register are identified through searches of CENTRAL, MEDLINE, and EMBASE, conference proceedings, the International Clinical Trials Register (ICTRP) Search Portal and ClinicalTrials.gov. We also searched MEDLINE (OVID) and EMBASE (OVID) for non-randomised studies. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) and non-randomised studies that assessed interventions aimed at improving health literacy in people with CKD. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two authors independently assessed studies for eligibility and performed risk of bias analysis. We classified studies as either interventions aimed at improving aspects of health literacy or interventions targeting a population of people with poor health literacy. The interventions were further sub-classified in terms of the type of intervention (educational, self-management training, or educational with self-management training). Results were expressed as mean difference (MD) or standardised mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence intervals (CI) for continuous outcomes and risk ratios (RR) with 95% CI for dichotomous outcomes. MAIN RESULTS: We identified 120 studies (21,149 participants) which aimed to improve health literacy. There were 107 RCTs and 13 non-randomised studies. No studies targeted low literacy populations. For the RCTs, selection bias was low or unclear in 94% of studies, performance bias was high in 86% of studies, detection bias was high in 86% of studies reporting subjective outcomes and low in 93% of studies reporting objective outcomes. Attrition and other biases were low or unclear in 86% and 78% of studies, respectively. Compared to usual care, low certainty evidence showed educational interventions may increase kidney-related knowledge (14 RCTs, 2632 participants: SMD 0.99, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.32; I² = 94%). Data for self-care, self-efficacy, quality of life (QoL), death, estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) and hospitalisations could not be pooled or was not reported. Compared to usual care, low-certainty evidence showed self-management interventions may improve self-efficacy (5 RCTs, 417 participants: SMD 0.58, 95% CI 0.13 to 1.03; I² = 74%) and QoL physical component score (3 RCTs, 131 participants: MD 4.02, 95% CI 1.09 to 6.94; I² = 0%). There was moderate-certainty evidence that self-management interventions probably did not slow the decline in eGFR after one year (3 RCTs, 855 participants: MD 1.53 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -1.41 to 4.46; I² = 33%). Data for knowledge, self-care behaviour, death and hospitalisations could not be pooled or was not reported. Compared to usual care, low-certainty evidence showed educational with self-management interventions may increase knowledge (15 RCTs, 2185 participants: SMD 0.65, 95% CI 0.36 to 0.93; I² = 90%), improve self-care behaviour scores (4 RCTs, 913 participants: SMD 0.91, 95% CI 0.00 to 1.82; I² =97%), self-efficacy (8 RCTs, 687 participants: SMD 0.50, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.89; I² = 82%), improve QoL physical component score (3 RCTs, 2771 participants: MD 2.56, 95% CI 1.73 to 3.38; I² = 0%) and may make little or no difference to slowing the decline of eGFR (4 RCTs, 618 participants: MD 4.28 mL/min/1.73 m², 95% CI -0.03 to 8.85; I² = 43%). Moderate-certainty evidence shows educational with self-management interventions probably decreases the risk of death (any cause) (4 RCTs, 2801 participants: RR 0.73, 95% CI 0.53 to 1.02; I² = 0%). Data for hospitalisation could not be pooled. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Interventions to improve aspects of health literacy are a very broad category, including educational interventions, self-management interventions and educational with self-management interventions. Overall, this type of health literacy intervention is probably beneficial in this cohort however, due to methodological limitations and high heterogeneity in interventions and outcomes, the evidence is of low certainty.

General practitioners' views and experiences of communicating with older people about cancer screening: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Older adults should be supported to make informed decisions about cancer screening. However, it is unknown how general practitioners (GPs) in Australia communicate about cancer screening with older people. AIM: To investigate GPs' views and experiences of communicating about cancer screening (breast, cervical, prostate, and bowel) with older people (≥70 years). DESIGN AND SETTING: Qualitative, semi-structured interviews, Australia. METHOD: Interviews were conducted with GPs practising in Australia (n = 28), recruited through practice-based research networks, primary health networks, social media, and email invitation. Interviews were audio-recorded and analysed thematically using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: Findings across GPs were organized into 3 themes: (i) varied motivation to initiate cancer screening discussions; some GPs reported that they only initiated screening within recommended ages (<75 years), others described initiating discussions beyond recommended ages, and some experienced older patient-initiated discussions; (ii) GPs described the role they played in providing screening information, whereby detailed discussions about the benefits/risks of prostate screening were more likely than other nationally funded screening types (breast, cervical, and bowel); however, some GPs had limited knowledge of recommendations and found it challenging to explain why screening recommendations have upper ages; (iii) GPs reported providing tailored advice and discussion based on personal patient preferences, overall health/function, risk of cancer, and previous screening. CONCLUSIONS: Strategies to support conversations between GPs and older people about the potential benefits and harms of screening in older age and rationale for upper age limits to screening programmes may be helpful. Further research in this area is needed.

Views of healthcare consumer representatives on defensive practice: 'We are your biggest advocate and supporter not the enemy'.

BACKGROUND: The patient-clinician interaction is a site at which defensive practice could occur, when clinicians provide tests, procedures and treatments mainly to reduce perceived legal risks, rather than to advance patient care. Defensive practice is a driver of low-value care and exposes patients to the risks of unnecessary interventions. To date, patient perspectives on defensive practice and its impacts on them are largely missing from the literature. This exploratory study conducted in Australia aimed to examine the views and experiences of healthcare consumer representatives in this under-examined area. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with healthcare consumer representatives involved in healthcare consumer advocacy organisations in Australia. Data were transcribed and analysed thematically. RESULTS: Nine healthcare consumer representatives participated. Most had over 20 years of involvement and advocacy in healthcare, including personal experiences as a patient or carer and/or formal service roles on committees or complaint bodies for healthcare organisations. Participants uniformly viewed defensive practice as having a negative impact on the clinician-patient relationship. Themes identified the importance of fostering patient-clinician partnership, effective communication and informed decision-making. The themes support a shift from the concept of defensive practice to preventive practice in partnership, which focuses on the shared interests of patients and clinicians in achieving safe and high-value care. CONCLUSION: This Australian study offers healthcare consumers' perspectives on the impacts of defensive practice on patients. The findings highlight the features of clinician-patient partnership that will help to improve communication and decision-making, and prevent the defensive provision of low-value care. PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: Healthcare consumer representatives were involved as participants in this study.

A qualitative interview study of Australian physicians on defensive practice and low value care: "it's easier to talk about our fear of lawyers than to talk about our fear of looking bad in front of each other".

BACKGROUND: Defensive practice occurs when physicians provide services, such as tests, treatments and referrals, mainly to reduce their perceived legal or reputational risks, rather than to advance patient care. This behaviour is counter to physicians' ethical responsibilities, yet is widely reported in surveys of doctors in various countries. There is a lack of qualitative research on the drivers of defensive practice, which is needed to inform strategies to prevent this ethically problematic behaviour. METHODS: A qualitative interview study investigated the views and experiences of physicians in Australia on defensive practice and its contribution to low value care. Interviewees were recruited based on interest in medico-legal issues or experience in a health service involved in 'Choosing Wisely' initiatives. Semi-structured interviews averaged 60 min in length. Data were coded using the Theoretical Domains Framework, which encapsulates theories of behaviour and behaviour change. RESULTS: All participants (n = 17) perceived defensive practice as a problem and a contributor to low value care. Behavioural drivers of defensive practice spanned seven domains in the TDF: knowledge, focused on inadequate knowledge of the law and the risks of low value care; skills, emphasising patient communication and clinical decision-making skills; professional role and identity, particularly clinicians' perception of patient expectations and concern for their professional reputation; beliefs about consequences, especially perceptions of the beneficial and harmful consequences of defensive practice; environmental context and resources, including processes for handling patient complaints; social influences, focused on group norms that encourage or discourage defensive behaviour; and emotions, especially fear of missing a diagnosis. Overall, defensive practice is motivated by physicians' desire to avoid criticism or scrutiny from a range of sources, and censure from their professional peers can be a more potent driver than perceived legal consequences. CONCLUSIONS: The findings call for strengthening knowledge and skills, for example, to improve clinicians' understanding of the law and their awareness of the risks of low value care and using effective communication strategies with patients. Importantly, supportive cultures of practice and organisational environments are needed to create conditions in which clinicians feel confident in avoiding defensive practice and other forms of low value care.

Geriatrician perspectives on perioperative care: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative medicine services for older surgical patients are being developed across several countries. This qualitative study aims to explore geriatricians' perspectives on challenges and opportunities for developing and delivering integrated geriatrics perioperative medicine services. METHODS: A qualitative phenomenological semi-structured interview design. All geriatric medicine departments in acute public hospitals across Australia and New Zealand (n = 81) were approached. Interviews were conducted with 38 geriatricians. Data were analysed thematically using a framework approach. RESULTS: Geriatricians identified several system level barriers to developing geriatrics perioperative medicine services. These included lack of funding for staffing, encroaching on existing consultative services, and competing clinical priorities. The key barrier at the healthcare professional level was the current lack of clarity of roles within the perioperative care team. Key facilitators were perceived unmet patient needs, existing support for geriatrician involvement from surgical and anaesthetic colleagues, and the unique skills geriatricians can bring to perioperative care. Despite reporting barriers, geriatricians are contemplating and implementing integrated proactive perioperative medicine services. Geriatricians identified a need to support other specialties gain clinical experience in geriatric medicine and called for pragmatic research to inform service development. CONCLUSIONS: Geriatricians perceive several challenges at the system and healthcare professional levels that are impacting current development of geriatrics perioperative medicine services. Yet their strong belief that patient needs can be met with their specialty skills and their high regard for team-based care, has created opportunities to implement innovative multidisciplinary models of care for older surgical patients. The barriers and evidence gaps highlighted in this study may be addressed by qualitative and implementation science research. Future work in this area may include application of patient-reported measures and qualitative research with patients to inform patient-centred perioperative care.

Impact of diagnostic labels and causal explanations for weight gain on diet intentions, cognitions and emotions: An experimental online study.

Disease labels and causal explanations for certain symptoms or conditions have been found to have both positive and negative outcomes. For example, a diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome could conceivably motivate a person to engage in weight management, which is the recommended first line treatment. Furthermore, doctors may feel more comfortable discussing weight when linked to a medical condition. However, such a diagnosis may elicit feelings of increased anxiety, perceived severity and reduced sense of control. Mixed findings are also evident for impacts of genetic explanations on psychosocial outcomes and behaviours. Using hypothetical scenarios presented in an online survey, participants were asked to imagine that they were visiting their general practitioner due to experiencing weight gain, irregular periods, and more pimples than usual. Participants were randomised to receive different diagnostic labels ('polycystic ovary syndrome', 'weight' or no label/description) and causal explanations (genetic or environmental) for their symptoms. Primary outcomes assessed included intention to eat a healthier diet and perceived personal control of weight (average score on scale 1-7 across 3 items). Secondary outcomes included weight stigma, blameworthiness, worry, perceived severity, self-esteem, belief diet will reduce risks and menu item choice. Participants were 545 females aged 18-45 years (mean = 33 years), living in Australia, recruited through a national online recruitment panel. The sample was overweight on average (BMI = 26.5). Participants reporting a PCOS diagnosis were excluded from analyses. We found no main effects of the label or explanation on intention to eat healthier or perceived personal control of weight. For secondary outcomes, those given the genetic explanation reported higher weight stigma (range 1-7; MD = 0.27, 95%CI: 0.011,0.522), greater worry (range 1-7; MD = 0.27, 95%CI: 0.037,0.496), lower self-esteem (range 10-40; MD = 1.26, 95%CI: 0.28 to 2.24) and perceived their weight as more severe (range 1-7; MD = 0.28; 95%CI: 0.05,0.52) than those given the environmental explanation, averaged over disease label given. These findings further highlight the deleterious effects of genetic explanations on psychosocial outcomes and reinforce the need for caution when communicating the aetiology of weight-related health issues.

The role of older patients' goals in GP decision-making about medicines: a qualitative study.

BACKGROUND: To optimise medication use in older people, it is recommended that clinicians evaluate evidence on potential benefits and harms of medicines in light of the patients' overall health, values and goals. This suggests general practitioners (GPs) should attempt to facilitate patient involvement in decision-making. In practice this is often challenging. In this qualitative study, we explored GPs' perspectives on the importance of discussing patients' goals and preferences, and the role patient preferences play in medicines management and prioritisation. METHODS: Semi-structured interviews were conducted with GPs from Australia (n = 32). Participants were purposively sampled to recruit GPs with variation in experience level and geographic location. Transcribed audio-recordings of interviews were coded using Framework Analysis. RESULTS: The results showed that most GPs recognised some value in understanding older patients' goals and preferences regarding their medicines. Most reported some discussions of goals and preferences with patients, but often this was initiated by the patient. Practical barriers were reported such as limited time during busy consultations to discuss issues beyond acute problems. GPs differed on the following main themes: 1) definition and perception of patients' goals, 2) relationship with the patient, 3) approach to medicines management and prioritisation. We observed that GPs preferred one of three different practice patterns in their approach to patients' goals in medicines decisions: 1) goals and preferences considered lower priority - 'Directive'; 2) goals seen as central - 'Goal-oriented'; 3) goals and preferences considered but not explicitly elicited - 'Tacit'. CONCLUSIONS: This study explores how GPs differ in their approach to eliciting patients' goals and preferences, and how these differences are operationalised in the context of older adults taking multiple medicines. Although there are challenges in providing care that aligns with patients' goals and preferences, this study shows how complex decisions are made between GPs and their older patients in clinical practice. This work may inform future research that investigates how GPs can best incorporate the priorities of older people in decision-making around medicines. Developing practical support strategies may assist clinicians to involve patients in discussions about their medicines.

Impact of a diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome on diet, physical activity and contraceptive use in young women: findings from the Australian Longitudinal Study of Women's Health.

STUDY QUESTION: Do diet, physical activity and contraceptive use change after receiving a diagnosis of polycystic ovary syndrome (PCOS)? SUMMARY ANSWER: Using longitudinal data 12 months apart, young women newly diagnosed with PCOS were more likely to stop using contraception but did not change their physical activity or vegetable intake. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Diagnostic criteria for PCOS have widened to capture more women, despite limited evidence of the benefits and harms. Possible benefits of a PCOS diagnosis are that it may help women with family planning and motivate them to implement healthy lifestyle changes to reduce the reproductive, metabolic and cardiovascular risks associated with PCOS. However, there are no empirical studies investigating how women respond to a diagnosis of PCOS with respect to their health behaviour, and longitudinal population-based studies are lacking. STUDY DESIGN, SIZE, DURATION: This is a longitudinal analysis of two waves of data collected 12 months apart from the cohort born 1989-1995 in the Australian Longitudinal Survey on Women's Health, a population-based cohort study. Women in this cohort were first surveyed in 2012-2013, aged 18-23 years. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS, SETTING, METHODS: Women who responded to the 2014 survey (aged 19-24, n = 11 344) and 2015 survey (aged 20-25, n = 8961) were included. Using logistic regression, multinomial logistic regression and linear regression, change in vegetable intake, physical activity and contraceptive use were compared for women newly diagnosed with PCOS to women not reporting a diagnosis of PCOS. Changes in psychological distress and BMI were also examined. MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Young women reporting a new diagnosis of PCOS were no more likely to increase their vegetable intake or physical activity than women not reporting a PCOS diagnosis. Women newly diagnosed with PCOS were 3.4 times more likely to stop using contraception during the 12-month study period than women without PCOS (14% versus 4%, 95% CI = 2.3 to 5.1, P < 0.001). This difference remained significant after controlling for demographics, chronic conditions associated with PCOS, endometriosis, BMI and psychological distress (P < 0.001). LIMITATIONS, REASONS FOR CAUTION: All data was self-reported including PCOS diagnosis, assessment of diet quality was limited to vegetable intake only. The exact timing of diagnosis within the 12-month period and whether the women intended to conceive are unknown. The number of women reporting a new diagnosis of PCOS was also relatively small. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE FINDINGS: These findings suggest that a diagnosis of PCOS may not produce short-term benefits by way of improving health behaviour. The observed reduction in contraception use suggests some women may be at increased risk of unplanned pregnancies, highlighting the importance of counselling about contraceptive needs. Both potential benefits and harms must be considered when determining the appropriateness of a PCOS diagnosis. STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTEREST(S): The Australian Longitudinal Study on Women's Health is funded by the Australian Government Department of Health. BWM reports consultancy for ObsEva, Merck, Merck KGaA and Guerbet. No further competing interests exist. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: N/A.

Availability and readability of patient education materials for deprescribing: An environmental scan.

AIMS: To identify and evaluate content and readability of freely available online deprescribing patient education materials (PEMs). METHODS: Systematic review of PEMs using MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, PsycINFO and The Cochrane Library of Systematic Reviews from inception to 25 September 2017 to identify PEMs. Additionally, deprescribing researchers and health professionals were surveyed to identify additional materials. Known repositories of materials were searched followed by a systematic Google search (22-28 January 2018). Materials were evaluated using an approach informed by the Patient Education Material Assessment Tool and the International Patient Decision Aids Standards Inventory. Readability of text-based materials was assessed using the US-based Gunning-Fog Index and Flesch-Kincaid Grade level. RESULTS: Forty-eight PEMs were identified. PEMs addressing deprescribing of medications for symptom control (81%) were most common. Preventative medications were rarely addressed and material (39%) focused on older people. Only 37% of PEMs provided information about both potential benefits (e.g. reducing risk of side effects) and harms (e.g. withdrawal symptoms, increased risk of disease) of deprescribing, while 40% focussed on benefits only. Readability indices indicated an average minimum reading level of Grade 12. Option Grids and Decision Aids (mean reading level below Grade 10) were most suitable for people with average literacy levels. CONCLUSIONS: Over 1/3 of deprescribing PEMs present potential benefits and harms of deprescribing indicating most of the freely available materials are not balanced. Most PEMs are pitched above average reading levels making them inaccessible for low health literacy populations.

The importance and challenges of shared decision making in older people with multimorbidity.

In a Perspective, Tammy Hoffmann and colleagues discuss medical decision making for elderly patients with multimorbidity.

Should heart age calculators be used alongside absolute cardiovascular disease risk assessment?

BACKGROUND: National estimates of 'heart age' by government health organisations in the US, UK and China show most people have an older heart age than current age. While most heart age calculators are promoted as a communication tool for lifestyle change, they may also be used to justify medication when clinical guidelines advocate their use alongside absolute risk assessment. However, only those at high absolute risk of a heart attack or stroke are likely to benefit from medication, and it is not always clear how heart age relates to absolute risk. This article aims to: 1) explain how heart age calculation methods relate to absolute risk guidelines; 2) summarise research investigating whether heart age improves risk communication; and 3) discuss implications for the use of medication and shared decision making in clinical practice. MAIN BODY: There is a large and growing number of heart age models and online calculators, but the clinical meaning of an older heart age result is highly variable. An older heart age result may indicate low, moderate or high absolute risk of a heart attack or stroke in the next 5-10 years, and the same individual may receive a younger or older heart age result depending on which calculator is used. Heart age may help doctors convey the need to change lifestyle, but it cannot help patients make an informed choice about medication to reduce CVD risk. CONCLUSION: Interactive heart age tools may be helpful as a communication tool to initiate lifestyle change to reduce risk factors. However, absolute risk should be used instead of heart age to enable informed decision making about medication, to avoid unnecessary treatment of low risk people. Evidence-based decision aids that improve patient understanding of absolute risk should be considered as alternatives to heart age calculators for lifestyle and medication decisions.

The deprescribing rainbow: a conceptual framework highlighting the importance of patient context when stopping medication in older people.

The area of "deprescribing" has rapidly expanded in recent years as a positive intervention to reduce inappropriate polypharmacy and improve health outcomes for (older) people with multimorbidity. While our understanding of deprescribing as a process has greatly improved and existing approaches all have patient-centered elements, there is still limited literature exploring the importance of the individual patient context in deprescribing decision-making. This is clearly an important consideration to ensure that any deprescribing approach is ethical, respectful, and successful. To address this gap in the literature, we have developed a conceptual framework in the form of a rainbow - with five different deprescribing determinants - and place the person at the center of the deprescribing process. This framework is informed by literature on patient-centered care for older people and people with multimorbidity. We illustrate the potential application of this framework to a complex patient case to highlight the importance of the different clinical, psychological, social, financial and physical deprescribing determinants, and how this approach could be adopted by those working in clinical practice.

Influence of the disease label 'polycystic ovary syndrome' on intention to have an ultrasound and psychosocial outcomes: a randomised online study in young women.

Study question: Does the disease label 'polycystic ovary syndrome' (PCOS) have an impact on desire for medical testing and psychosocial outcomes? Summary answer: When given the disease label PCOS in a hypothetical scenario, participants had higher intention to have an ultrasound, perceived the condition to be more severe and had lower self-esteem than those not given the disease label. What is known already: Widening diagnostic criteria and improved imaging sensitivity have increased the number of reproductive-aged women diagnosed with PCOS from 4% to 8% to up to 21%. The uncertain clinical benefit of knowing this diagnosis needs to be weighed against the potential for poor psychological outcomes in women labelled with PCOS. Study design, size, duration: This experimental online study randomised 181 young women to receive one of four hypothetical scenarios of a doctor's visit in a 2 (PCOS disease label versus no disease label) x 2 (information about unreliability of ultrasounds in clarifying diagnosis versus no information) design. Participants/materials, setting, methods: Participants were university students (mean age: 19.4). After presenting the scenario, intention to have an ultrasound, negative affect, self-esteem, perceived severity of condition, credibility of the doctor and interest in a second opinion were measured. Participants were then presented with a second scenario, where the possibility of PCOS overdiagnosis was mentioned. Change in intention and perceived severity were then measured. Main results and the role of chance: Participants given the PCOS label had significantly higher intention to have an ultrasound (mean = 6.62 versus mean = 5.76, P = 0.033, 95% CI(difference) = 0.069-1.599), perceived the condition to be more severe (17.17 versus 15.82, P = 0.019, 95% CI(difference) = 0.229-2.479) and had lower self-esteem (25.86 versus 27.56, P = 0.031, 95% CI(difference) = -3.187 to -0.157). After receiving overdiagnosis information, both intention and perceived severity decreased, regardless of condition (both P < 0.001). Limitations, reasons for caution: This study used hypothetical scenarios; it is likely that for women facing a real diagnosis of PCOS, outcomes would be more affected than in the current study. The hypothetical design, however, allowed the symptoms and risks of PCOS to be held constant across conditions, the impact on intention and psychosocial outcomes directly attributable to the effect of the disease label. Wider implications of the findings: These findings demonstrate the potential negative consequences of PCOS labelling. It is crucial we consider the impact of the label before diagnosing more women with PCOS when clinical benefit of this diagnosis is uncertain. Study funding/competing interest(s): This paper was written with support from a NHMRC grant awarded to the Screening and Test Evaluation Program. J.J. is supported by an NHMRC Early Career Fellowship. K.M. is supported by an NHMRC Career Development Fellowship. The authors declare that no competing interests exist. Trial registration number: ACTRN12617000111370. Trial registration date: 20/01/2017. Date of first patient's enrolment: 01/06/2015.

A systematic review of interventions to deprescribe benzodiazepines and other hypnotics among older people.

PURPOSE: Benzodiazepines are effective medicines for insomnia and anxiety but are commonly used beyond recommended treatment time frames, which may lead to adverse drug events. The aim of this systematic review was to critically evaluate the success of interventions used to reduce benzodiazepines and 'Z-drug' use, and the impact of these interventions on clinical outcomes in older adults. METHODS: A search was conducted in PubMed, Embase, Informit, International Pharmaceutical Abstracts, Scopus, PsychINFO, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) and CINAHL. Studies conducted in older adults (≥65 years) and published between January 1995 and July 2015 were included. Two authors independently reviewed all articles for eligibility and extracted the data. RESULTS: Seven studies of benzodiazepines and Z-drug withdrawal were identified. Benzodiazepine discontinuation rates were 64.3% in one study that employed pharmacological substitution with melatonin and 65.0% in a study that employed general practitioner-targeted intervention. Mixed interventions including patient education and tapering (n = 2), pharmacological substitution with psychological support (n = 1) and tapering with psychological support (n = 1) yielded discontinuation rates between 27.0 and 80.0%. Five studies measured clinical outcomes following benzodiazepine discontinuation. Most (n = 4) observed no difference in prevalence of withdrawal symptoms or sleep quality, while one study reported decline in quality of life in those who continued taking benzodiazepine vs. those who discontinued over 8 months. CONCLUSIONS: Current evidence shows that benzodiazepine withdrawal is feasible in the older population, but withdrawal rates vary according to the type of intervention. As the benefits and sustainability of these interventions are unclear, further studies should be conducted to assess this.