Factors influencing decision regret regarding placement of a PEG among substitute decision-makers of older persons in Japan: a prospective study.

BACKGROUND: A tube feeding decision aid designed at the Ottawa Health Research Institute was specifically created for substitute decision-makers who must decide whether to allow placement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube in a cognitively impaired older person. We developed a Japanese version and found that the decision aid promoted the decision-making process of substitute decision-makers to decrease decisional conflict and increase knowledge. However, the factors that influence decision regret among substitute decision-makers were not measured after the decision was made. The objective of this study was to explore the factors that influence decision regret among substitute decision-makers 6 months after using a decision aid for PEG placement. METHODS: In this prospective study, participants comprised substitute decision-makers for 45 inpatients aged 65 years and older who were being considered for placement of a PEG tube in hospitals, nursing homes and patients' homes in Japan. The Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) was used to evaluate decisional conflict among substitute decision-makers immediately after deciding whether to introduce tube feeding and the Decision Regret Scale (DRS) was used to evaluate decisional regret among substitute decision-makers 6 months after they made their decision. Normalized scores were evaluated and analysis of variance was used to compare groups. RESULTS: The results of the multiple regression analysis suggest that PEG placement (P < .01) and decision conflict (P < .001) are explanatory factors of decision regret regarding placement of a PEG among substitute decision-makers. CONCLUSIONS: PEG placement and decision conflict immediately after deciding whether to allow PEG placement have an influence on decision regret among substitute decision-makers after 6 months.