Investigating genetic counselors' communication with Lynch syndrome patients about cascade testing: Barriers, facilitators, and strategies.

Cascade testing is an imperative process to engage Lynch syndrome patients' at-risk relatives in early cancer risk reduction interventions. How genetic counselors communicate about cascade testing is crucial to patients' intentions of and actual involvement in family communication. Based on data from 20 interviews with genetic counselors, this qualitative study examined their perceptions of barriers and facilitators of offering cascade testing to at-risk relatives and the specific communication strategies they use to discuss cascade testing with patients. We identified patient-level, genetic counselor-level, and system-level barriers and facilitators of having discussions with Lynch syndrome patients about cascade testing. The qualitative data also revealed four prominent communication strategies that genetic counselors use for such discussions: build rapport, reframe the benefits of family communication, adapt communication, and provide various resources. These findings highlight genetic counselors' needs of practical and structural support to facilitate their communication about cascade testing, especially when patients are hesitant or lack resources or skills to notify at-risk relatives about cascade testing.

Parents' quality of life and health after treatment decision for a fetus with severe congenital heart defect.

PURPOSE: This exploratory study examines differences in parents' quality of life by treatment decision and the child's survival outcome in the context of life-threatening congenital heart disease (CHD). DESIGN AND METHODS: Parents of a fetus or neonate diagnosed with severe CHD enrolled in the observational control group of a clinical trial (NCT04437069) and completed quality of life (i.e., contact with clinicians, social support, partner relationship, state of mind), mental and physical health survey measures. Comparisons were made between parents who chose comfort-directed care or surgery and between those whose child did and did not survive. RESULTS: Parents who chose surgery and their child did not survive reported the most contact with their clinicians. Parents who chose comfort-directed care reported lower social support than parents who chose surgery and their child did not survive as well as poorer state of mind compared to parents who chose surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Some aspects of parents' quality of life differed based on their treatment decision. Parents who choose comfort-directed care are vulnerable to some negative outcomes. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Decision support tools and bereavement resources to assist parents with making and coping with a complex treatment decision is important for clinical care.

Randomized evaluation of decision support interventions for atrial fibrillation: Rationale and design of the RED-AF study.

BACKGROUND: Shared decision making (SDM) improves the likelihood that patients will receive care in a manner consistent with their priorities. To facilitate SDM, decision aids (DA) are commonly used, both to prepare a patient before their clinician visit, as well as to facilitate discussion during the visit. However, the relative efficacy of patient-focused or encounter-based DAs on SDM and patient outcomes remains largely unknown. We aim to directly estimate the comparative effectiveness of two DA's on SDM observed in encounters to discuss stroke prevention strategies in patients with atrial fibrillation (AF). METHODS: The study aims to recruit 1200 adult patients with non-valvular AF who qualify for anticoagulation therapy, and their clinicians who manage stroke prevention strategies, in a 2x2 cluster randomized multi-center trial at six sites. Two DA's were developed as interactive, online, non-linear tools: a patient decision aid (PDA) to be used by patients before the encounter, and an encounter decision aid (EDA) to be used by clinicians with their patients during the encounter. Patients will be randomized to PDA or usual care; clinicians will be randomized to EDA or usual care. RESULTS: Primary outcomes are quality of SDM, patient decision making, and patient knowledge. Secondary outcomes include anticoagulation choice, adherence, and clinical events. CONCLUSION: This trial is the first randomized, head-to-head comparison of the effects of an EDA versus a PDA on SDM. Our results will help to inform future SDM interventions to improve patients' AF outcomes and experiences with stroke prevention strategies.

Parents' decision-making for their foetus or neonate with a severe congenital heart defect.

BACKGROUND: Parents who receive a diagnosis of a severe, life-threatening CHD for their foetus or neonate face a complex and stressful decision between termination, palliative care, or surgery. Understanding how parents make this initial treatment decision is critical for developing interventions to improve counselling for these families. METHODS: We conducted focus groups in four academic medical centres across the United States of America with a purposive sample of parents who chose termination, palliative care, or surgery for their foetus or neonate diagnosed with severe CHD. RESULTS: Ten focus groups were conducted with 56 parents (Mage = 34 years; 80% female; 89% White). Results were constructed around three domains: decision-making approaches; values and beliefs; and decision-making challenges. Parents discussed varying approaches to making the decision, ranging from relying on their "gut feeling" to desiring statistics and probabilities. Religious and spiritual beliefs often guided the decision to not terminate the pregnancy. Quality of life was an important consideration, including how each option would impact the child (e.g., pain or discomfort, cognitive and physical abilities) and their family (e.g., care for other children, marriage, and career). Parents reported inconsistent communication of options by clinicians and challenges related to time constraints for making a decision and difficulty in processing information when distressed. CONCLUSION: This study offers important insights that can be used to design interventions to improve decision support and family-centred care in clinical practice.

Surveillance Cessation for Barrett's Esophagus: A Survey of Gastroenterologists.

INTRODUCTION: Regular endoscopic surveillance is the gold standard Barrett's esophagus (BE) surveillance, yet harms of surveillance for some patients may outweigh the benefits. We sought to characterize physicians' BE surveillance cessation recommendations. METHODS: We surveyed gastroenterologists about their BE surveillance recommendations varying patient age, comorbidity, and BE length. RESULTS: Clinicians varied in recommendations for repeat surveillance. Patient age showed the largest variation among decisions, whereas BE length varied the least. DISCUSSION: Age and comorbidities seem to influence BE surveillance cessation decisions, but with variation. Clear cessation guidelines balancing the risks and benefits for BE surveillance are warranted.

Factors Associated With Decision Regret Among Patients With Diverticulitis in the Elective Setting.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to identify decision process measures associated with patient decisional regret regarding the decision to pursue elective colectomy or observation for diverticulitis. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center cross-sectional survey study. We included adult patients treated for diverticulitis between 2014 and 2019 and excluded patients who required urgent or emergent colectomy. The primary outcome was regret regarding the decision to pursue elective surgery or observation for diverticulitis, measured using the Decision Regret Scale. We used multivariable linear regression to examine hypothesized predictors of decision regret, including decisional conflict (Decision Conflict Scale and its subscales), shared decision-making, and decision role concordance. RESULTS: Of 923 eligible patients, 133 were included in the analysis. Patients had a median of five episodes of diverticulitis (interquartile range 3-8), occurring a median of 2 y (interquartile range 1-3) before survey administration. Thirty-eight patients (29%) underwent elective surgery for diverticulitis. Decision regret (Decision Regret Scale score ≥25) was present in 42 patients (32%). After controlling for surgery, gender, health status, and years since treatment, decision regret was associated with decisional conflict and inversely associated with values clarity, decision role concordance, shared decision-making, and feeling informed, supported, and effective in decision-making (all P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Nearly one-third of survey respondents experienced regret regarding the decision between elective surgery and observation for diverticulitis. Decision regret may be reduced through efforts to improve patient knowledge, values clarity, role concordance, and shared decision-making.

Patient Willingness to Accept Antibiotic Side Effects to Reduce Surgical Site Infection After Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Mechanical bowel preparation with antibiotics is associated with decreased surgical site infections (SSI) after colorectal surgery. However, antibiotics have side effects, such as vomiting. It is unknown how patient willingness to take antibiotics is affected by side effect severity. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This was a single-center study of 86 patients (37 undergoing colorectal surgery) using a modified standard gamble technique. We presented patients with four hypothetical scenarios, holding SSI reduction constant and varying antibiotic side effect severity. Patients reported willingness to take antibiotics using a scale from 0 to 100. Patients also reported the maximum level of side effects they would accept. We examined the association between side effect severity and willingness to take antibiotics with a multivariable mixed-effects regression model and investigated differences in surgical and nonsurgical patients. RESULTS: After adjusting for age, sex, and patient type, willingness scores decreased with increasing side effect severity. No side effects: 92 (CI 86,99), mild: 83 (CI 76,90), moderate: 76 (CI 69,83), and severe: 46 (CI 38,52), P < 0.001. Surgical patients were more willing to take antibiotics at all severity levels compared with nonsurgical patients, P < 0.001. Surgical (57%) and nonsurgical (58%) patients reported that they would accept moderate side effects. Patients with prior SSI (n = 5) would take antibiotics regardless of side effect severity. CONCLUSIONS: Increasing antibiotic side effect severity is associated with decreased willingness to take antibiotics during bowel preparation, despite a reduction in SSI. Adherence may be improved with strategies that increase patient education and decrease side effects during bowel preparation.

Ileostomy or ileal pouch-anal anastomosis for ulcerative colitis: patient participation and decisional needs.

BACKGROUND: Up to 30% of patients with ulcerative colitis will undergo surgery resulting in an ileal pouch-anal anastomosis (IPAA) or permanent end ileostomy (EI). We aimed to understand how patients decide between these two options. METHODS: We performed semi-structured interviews with ulcerative colitis patients who underwent surgery. Areas of questioning included the degree to which patients participated in decision-making, challenges experienced, and suggestions for improving the decision-making process. We analyzed the data using a directed content and thematic approach. RESULTS: We interviewed 16 patients ranging in age from 28 to 68 years. Nine were male, 10 underwent IPAA, and 6 underwent EI. When it came to participation in decision-making, 11 patients felt independently responsible for decision-making, 3 shared decision-making with the surgeon, and 2 experienced surgeon-led decision-making. Themes regarding challenges during decision-making included lack of support from family, lack of time to discuss options with the surgeon, and the overwhelming complexity of the decision. Themes for ways to improve decision-making included the need for additional information, the desire for peer education, and earlier consultation with a surgeon. Only 3 patients were content with the information used to decide about surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Patients with ulcerative colitis who need surgery largely experience independence when deciding between IPAA and EI, but struggle with inadequate educational information and social support. Patients may benefit from early access to surgeons and peer guidance to enhance independence in decision-making. Preoperative educational materials describing surgical complications and postoperative lifestyle could improve decision-making and facilitate discussions with loved ones.

Predictors of households at risk for food insecurity in the United States during the COVID-19 pandemic.

OBJECTIVE: To examine associations between sociodemographic and mental health characteristics with household risk for food insecurity during the COVID-19 outbreak. DESIGN: Cross-sectional online survey analysed using univariable tests and a multivariable logistic regression model. SETTING: The United States during the week of 30 March 2020. PARTICIPANTS: A convenience sample of 1965 American adults using Amazon's Mechanical Turk platform. Participants reporting household food insecurity prior to the pandemic were excluded from analyses. RESULTS: One thousand two hundred and fifty participants reported household food security before the COVID-19 outbreak. Among this subset, 41 % were identified as at risk for food insecurity after COVID-19, 55 % were women and 73 % were white. On a multivariable analysis, race, income, relationship status, living situation, anxiety and depression were significantly associated with an incident risk for food insecurity. Black, Asian and Hispanic/Latino respondents, respondents with an annual income <$100 000 and those living with children or others were significantly more likely to be newly at risk for food insecurity. Individuals at risk for food insecurity were 2·60 (95 % CI 1·91, 3·55) times more likely to screen positively for anxiety and 1·71 (95 % CI 1·21, 2·42) times more likely to screen positively for depression. CONCLUSIONS: An increased risk for food insecurity during the COVID-19 pandemic is common, and certain populations are particularly vulnerable. There are strong associations between being at risk for food insecurity and anxiety/depression. Interventions to increase access to healthful foods, especially among minority and low-income individuals, and ease the socioemotional effects of the outbreak are crucial to relieving the economic stress of this pandemic.

Persistent effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on diet, exercise, risk for food insecurity, and quality of life: A longitudinal study among U.S. adults.

COVID-19 has affected the health and well-being of almost every American. The aim of this study was to examine the sustained impacts of COVID-19 prevention measures on the diet and exercise habits, risk for food insecurity, and quality of life among adults in the U.S. We conducted a longitudinal study using a convenience sample of participants recruited via Amazon's Mechanical Turk (MTurk) platform between March 30 and April 7, 2020, and 8 months into the outbreak, from November 2 to November 21, 2020. We compared self-reported diet and exercise habits and risk for food insecurity shortly after the pandemic began, in April, to those reported in November. We also measured changes in quality-of-life using the PROMIS-29 + 2 (PROPr) scale. A total of 636 respondents completed both surveys. Compared to reports in April, respondents ate lunch and dinner out more frequently in November and consumed more take-out and fast food. Weekly frequencies of consuming frozen food and the number of daily meals were slightly lower in November than they were in April. 54% of respondents screened positively for being at risk for food insecurity in April, reducing to 41% by November. In April, survey respondents were found to have lower quality-of-life relative to U.S. population norms, but by November levels of depression and cognitive function had improved. Our findings underscore how the initial effects of the pandemic on diet, exercise, risk for food insecurity, and quality of life have evolved. As U.S. states re-open, continued efforts to encourage healthy eating and support mental health, especially to reduce feelings of anxiety and social isolation, remain important to mitigate the potential long-term effects of the pandemic.

Provider insights on shared decision-making with families affected by CHD.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Little data exist on provider perspectives about counselling and shared decision-making for complex CHD, ways to support and improve the process, and barriers to effective communication. The goal of this qualitative study was to determine providers' perspectives regarding factors that are integral to shared decision-making with parents faced with complex CHD in their fetus or newborn; and barriers and facilitators to engaging in effective shared decision-making. METHODS: We conducted semi-structured interviews with providers from different areas of practice who care for fetuses and/or children with CHD. Providers were recruited from four geographically diverse centres. Interviews were recorded, transcribed, and analysed for key themes using an open coding process with a grounded theory approach. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 31 providers; paediatric cardiologists (n = 7) were the largest group represented, followed by nurses (n = 6) and palliative care providers (n = 5). Key barriers to communication with parents that providers identified included variability among providers themselves, factors that influenced parental comprehension or understanding, discrepant expectations, circumstantial barriers, and trust/relationship with providers. When discussing informational needs of parents, providers focused on comprehensive short- and long-term outcomes, quality of life, and breadth and depth that aligned with parental goals and needs. In discussing resources to support shared decision-making, providers emphasised the need for comprehensive, up-to-date information that was accessible to parents of varying situations and backgrounds. CONCLUSIONS: Provider perspectives on decision-making with families with CHD highlighted key communication issues, informational priorities, and components of decision support that can enhance shared decision-making.

Evaluation of National Comprehensive Cancer Network guideline-based Tool for Risk Assessment for breast and ovarian Cancer (N-TRAC): A patient-reported survey for genetic high-risk assessment for breast and ovarian cancers in women.

Identification of mutations that increase lifetime risk of breast and ovarian cancer is critical to improving women's health. Because these mutations are relatively rare in the general population, there is a need for efficient methods to identify appropriate women to undergo genetic testing. The objective of this study was to assess the feasibility, accuracy, and performance of the NCCN guideline-based Tool for Risk Assessment for breast and ovarian Cancer (N-TRAC)-a patient-facing assessment for those affected and unaffected by cancer. This study enrolled a prospective cohort of 100 affected and 100 unaffected women that used N-TRAC in a clinical setting. Recommendations for referral to genetic counseling based on N-TRAC and other standard risk assessment methods were compared.Seventy-seven of the 100 affected women and 35 of the 100 unaffected women were identified as high risk by N-TRAC. The average completion time was approximately 2 min for both groups. N-TRAC accuracy for family history was exceptional in both groups (kappa > 0.96). N-TRAC and other risk assessment methods do not always identify the same high risk population. N-TRAC is an accurate and feasible tool that can assist in identifying women at increased risk for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer and may lead to more informed decision-making.

Estrogen-receptor status and risk of contralateral breast cancer following DCIS.

PURPOSE: As local therapies improve, contralateral breast cancer (CBC) risk for women with ductal carcinoma in situ (DCIS) may exceed the risk of a second ipsilateral breast cancer. We sought to determine whether estrogen-receptor (ER) status influenced CBC risk. METHODS: We identified women aged 40-79 with DCIS diagnosed between 1990 and 2002 using the Surveillance, Epidemiology, and End Results database. We used multivariable competing risk regression to examine predictors of time from index DCIS to CBC (invasive or in situ). RESULTS: Multivariable competing risk regression found ER status to be a highly significant predictor of CBC. The 10-year cumulative incidence was estimated to be 5.3% (95% CI 4.8-5.8%) among ER positive (ER+) cases and 3.3% (95% CI 2.6-4.0%) among ER negative (ER-). CONCLUSIONS: This finding suggests that ER+ DCIS may represent a field effect that confers increased propensity for developing cancer across breast tissue, regardless of laterality. In contrast, ER- DCIS may represent an isolated local event. Given that the majority of DCIS is ER+, and only a minority of DCIS patients receive hormonal therapy, consideration of ER status may influence treatment and surveillance approaches.

How Do Women View Risk-Based Mammography Screening? A Qualitative Study.

BACKGROUND: Decades of persuasive messages have reinforced the importance of traditional screening mammography at regular intervals. A potential new paradigm, risk-based screening, adjusts mammography frequency based on a woman's estimated breast cancer risk in order to maximize mortality reduction while minimizing false positives and overdiagnosis. Women's views of risk-based screening are unknown. OBJECTIVE: To explore women's views and personal acceptability of a potential risk-based mammography screening paradigm. DESIGN: Four semi-structured focus group discussions about screening mammography and surveys before provision of information about risk-based screening. We analyzed coded focus group transcripts using a mixed deductive (content analysis) and inductive (grounded theory) approach. PARTICIPANTS: Convenience sample of 29 women (40-74 years old) with no personal history of breast cancer recruited by print and online media in New Hampshire and Vermont. RESULTS: Twenty-seven out of 29 women reported having undergone mammography screening. All participants were white and most were highly educated. Some women accepted the idea that early cancer detection with traditional screening was beneficial-although many also reported hearing inconsistent recommendations from clinicians and mixed messages from media reports about mammography. Some women were familiar with a risk-based screening paradigm (primarily related to cervical cancer, n = 8) and thought matching screening mammography frequency to personal risk made sense (n = 8). Personal acceptability of risk-based screening was mixed. Some believed risk-based screening could reduce the harms of false positives and overdiagnosis (n = 7). Others thought screening less often might result in missing a dangerous diagnosis (n = 14). Many (n = 18) expressed concerns about the feasibility of risk-based screening and questioned whether breast cancer risk estimates could be accurate. Some suspected that risk-based mammography was motivated by a desire to save money (n = 6). CONCLUSION: Some women thought risk-based screening made sense. Willingness to abandon traditional screening for the new paradigm was mixed. Broad acceptability of risk-based screening will require clearer communication about its rationale and feasibility and consistent messages from the health care team.

Using CollaboRATE, a brief patient-reported measure of shared decision making: Results from three clinical settings in the United States.

INTRODUCTION: CollaboRATE is a brief patient survey focused on shared decision making. This paper aims to (i) provide insight on facilitators and challenges to implementing a real-time patient survey and (ii) evaluate CollaboRATE scores and response rates across multiple clinical settings with varied patient populations. METHOD: All adult patients at three United States primary care practices were eligible to complete CollaboRATE post-visit. To inform key learnings, we aggregated all mentions of unanticipated decisions, problems and administration errors from field notes and email communications. Mixed-effects logistic regression evaluated the impact of site, clinician, patient age and patient gender on the CollaboRATE score. RESULTS: While CollaboRATE score increased only slightly with increasing patient age (OR 1.018, 95% CI 1.014-1.021), female patient gender was associated with significantly higher CollaboRATE scores (OR 1.224, 95% CI 1.073-1.397). Clinician also predicts CollaboRATE score (random effect variance 0.146). Site-specific factors such as clinical workflow and checkout procedures play a key role in successful in-clinic implementation and are significantly related to CollaboRATE scores, with Site 3 scoring significantly higher than Site 1 (OR 1.759, 95% CI 1.216 to 2.545) or Site 2 (z=-2.71, 95% CI -1.114 to -0.178). DISCUSSION: This study demonstrates that CollaboRATE can be used in diverse primary care settings. A clinic's workflow plays a crucial role in implementation. Patient experience measurement risks becoming a burden to both patients and administrators. Episodic use of short measurement tools could reduce this burden.

A Novel Decision Aid for Surgical Patients with Ulcerative Colitis: Results of a Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Up to 30% of patients who have ulcerative colitis are faced with the complex decision between end ileostomy and IPAA. We developed a decision aid to encourage shared decision making between patients and surgeons. OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to determine whether a decision aid is effective and acceptable for surgical patients with ulcerative colitis and their treating surgeons. DESIGN: This was a prospective cohort study. SETTINGS: Patients and surgeons were enrolled from 3 colorectal surgery clinics. PATIENTS: Consecutive adult patients with ulcerative colitis who were candidates for IPAA and end ileostomy were selected. INTERVENTIONS: Patients used a multilingual decision aid before meeting with the surgeon. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: We measured changes in knowledge, treatment preference, and stage of decision making, as well as preparation for decision making, patient satisfaction, and surgeon satisfaction after using the decision aid. RESULTS: Twenty-five patients were enrolled; 5 had previously undergone subtotal colectomy. After using the decision aid, patients' knowledge scores improved by 39% (p < 0.006), 6 patients changed their treatment preference, and 8 reported increased certainty in treatment preference. The median for preparation for decision making was 75 of 100. Patient satisfaction with the decision aid (median score, 37/41) and surgeon satisfaction with the clinical encounter (median score, 38/45) were high. Patients who previously underwent subtotal colectomy had lower preparation for decision-making scores (median score, 58 vs 78 for surgery-naïve patients, p = 0.06), and did not report increased certainty in treatment preference after using the decision aid. LIMITATIONS: The study included a small sample with no comparison group. CONCLUSIONS: A novel decision aid for surgical patients with ulcerative colitis appears to be effective and acceptable in patients and surgeons from diverse clinical settings. Patients who have not yet initiated surgical treatment seem to benefit most. Future studies to validate the knowledge questionnaire and test the decision aid in a randomized fashion are warranted.

onlineDeCISion.org: a web-based decision aid for DCIS treatment.

Women diagnosed with DCIS face complex treatment decisions and often do so with inaccurate and incomplete understanding of the risks and benefits involved. Our objective was to create a tool to guide these decisions for both providers and patients. We developed a web-based decision aid designed to provide clinicians with tailored information about a patient's recurrence risks and survival outcomes following different treatment strategies for DCIS. A theoretical framework, microsimulation model (Soeteman et al., J Natl Cancer 105:774­781, 2013) and best practices for web-based decision tools guided the development of the decision aid. The development process used semi-structured interviews and usability testing with key stakeholders, including a diverse group of multidisciplinary clinicians and a patient advocate. We developed onlineDeCISion.​org to include the following features that were rated as important by the stakeholders: (1) descriptions of each of the standard treatment options available; (2) visual projections of the likelihood of time-specific (10-year and lifetime) breast-preservation, recurrence, and survival outcomes; and (3) side-by-side comparisons of down-stream effects of each treatment choice. All clinicians reviewing the decision aid in usability testing were interested in using it in their clinical practice. The decision aid is available in a web-based format and is planned to be publicly available. To improve treatment decision making in patients with DCIS, we have developed a web-based decision aid onlineDeCISion.​org that conforms to best practices and that clinicians are interested in using in their clinics with patients to better inform treatment decisions.

Personalized Medicine Through SNP Testing for Breast Cancer Risk: Clinical Implementation.

Single nucleotide polymorphisms (SNPs) have the potential to improve personalized medicine in breast cancer care. As new SNPs are discovered, further enhancing risk classification, SNP testing may serve to complement family history and phenotypic risk factors when assessed in a clinical setting. SNP analysis is particularly relevant to high-risk women who may seek out such information to guide their decision-making around risk-reduction. However, little is known about how high-risk women may respond to SNP testing with regard to clinical decision-making. We examined high-risk women's interest in SNP testing for breast cancer risk through an online survey of hypothetical testing scenarios. Women stated their preferences for sharing test results and selected the most likely follow-up action they would pursue in each of the test result scenarios (above average and below average risk for breast cancer). Four hundred seventy-eight women participated. Most women (89 %) did not know what a SNP was prior to the study. Once SNP testing was described, 75 % were interested in SNP testing. Participants stated an interest in lifestyle interventions for risk-reduction and wanted to discuss their testing results with their doctor or a genetic counselor. Women are interested in SNP testing and are prepared to make lifestyle changes based on testing results. Women's preference for discussing testing results with a healthcare provider aligns with the current trend towards SNP testing in a clinical setting.