Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Shared decision-making for the management of small renal masses: Development and acceptability testing of a novel patient decision aid.
McAlpine, Kristen; Breau, Rodney H; Stacey, Dawn; Knee, Christopher; Jewett, Michael A S; Violette, Philippe D; Richard, Patrick O; Cagiannos, Ilias; Morash, Christopher; Lavallée, Luke T.
Afiliação
  • McAlpine K; Division of Urology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
  • Breau RH; Division of Urology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
  • Stacey D; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
  • Knee C; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
  • Jewett MAS; School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
  • Violette PD; Division of Urology, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
  • Richard PO; Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada.
  • Cagiannos I; Departments of Surgery (Urology) and Surgical Oncology, Princess Margaret Cancer Centre, University Health Network and the University of Toronto, Toronto, ON, Canada.
  • Morash C; Departments of Health Research Methods Evidence and Impact and Surgery, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada.
  • Lavallée LT; Division of Urology, University of Sherbrooke, Sherbrooke, QC, Canada.
Can Urol Assoc J ; 14(12): 385-391, 2020 Dec.
Article em En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32574143
ABSTRACT

INTRODUCTION:

Shared decision-making incorporates patients' values and preferences to achieve high-quality decisions. The objective of this study was to develop an acceptable patient decision aid to facilitate shared decision-making for the management of small renal masses (SRMs).

METHODS:

The International Patient Decision Aids Standards were used to guide an evidence-based development process. Management options included active surveillance, thermal ablation, partial nephrectomy, and radical nephrectomy. A literature review was performed to provide incidence rates for outcomes of each option. Once a prototype was complete, alpha-testing was performed using a 10-question survey to assess acceptability with patients, patient advocates, urologists, and methodological experts. The primary outcome was acceptability of the decision aid.

RESULTS:

A novel patient decision aid was created to facilitate shared decision-making for the management of SRMs. Acceptability testing was performed with 20 patients, 10 urologists, two patient advocates, and one methodological expert. Responders indicated the decision aid was appropriate in length (82%, 27/33), well-balanced (82%, 27/33), and had language that was easy to follow (94%, 31/33). All patient responders felt the decision aid would have been helpful during their consultation and would recommend the decision aid for future patients (100%, 20/20). Most urologists reported they intend to use the decision aid (90%, 9/10).

CONCLUSIONS:

A novel patient decision aid was created to facilitate shared decision-making for management of SRMs. This clinical tool was acceptable with patients, patient advocates, and urologists and is freely available at https//decisionaid.ohri.ca/decaids.html.

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article

Texto completo: 1 Base de dados: MEDLINE Tipo de estudo: Guideline / Prognostic_studies / Qualitative_research Idioma: En Ano de publicação: 2020 Tipo de documento: Article