Impact of Timing on Measurement of Decision Quality and Shared Decision Making: Longitudinal Cohort Study of Breast Cancer Patients
Affiliations
- PMID: 31354095
- DOI: 10.1177/0272989X19862545
Abstract
Purpose.The objective of this study was to examine whether scores of shared decision-making measures differ when collected shortly after (1 month) or long after (1 year) breast cancer surgical treatment decisions. Methods. Longitudinal, multisite survey of breast cancer (BC) patients, with measurements at 1 month and 1 year after surgery at 4 cancer centers. Patients completed the BC Surgery Decision Quality Instrument (used to generate a knowledge score, ratings of goals, and concordance with treatment preferences) and Shared Decision Making (SDM) Process survey at both time points. We tested several hypotheses related to the scores over time, including whether the scores discriminated between sites that did and did not offer formal decision support services. Exploratory analyses examined factors associated with large increases and decreases in scores over time. Results. Across the 4 sites, 229 patients completed both assessments. The mean total knowledge scores (69.2% [SD 16.6%] at 1 month and 69.4% [SD 17.7%] at 1 year, P = 0.86), SDM Process scores (2.7 [SD 1.1] 1 month v. 2.7 [SD 1.2] 1 year, P = 0.68), and the percentage of patients receiving their preferred treatment (92% at 1 month and 92% at 1 year, P = 1.0) were not significantly different over time. The site using formal decision support had significantly higher knowledge and SDM Process scores at 1 month, and only the SDM Process scores remained significantly higher at 1 year. A significant percentage of patients had large changes in their individual knowledge and SDM Process scores, with increases balancing out decreases. Conclusion. For population-level assessments, it is reasonable to survey BC patients up to a year after the decision, greatly increasing feasibility of measurement. For those evaluating decision support interventions, shorter follow-up is more likely to detect an impact on knowledge scores.
Keywords: bias; breast neoplasms; choice behavior; decision making; goals; mastectomy; questionnaires; segmental; surveys.
Similar articles
- The Effects of Shared Decision Making on Cancer Screening – A Systematic Review [Internet].Washington (DC): Department of Veterans Affairs (US); 2014 Sep.PMID: 26290937 Free Books & Documents. Review.
- Does the use of shared decision-making consultation behaviors increase treatment decision-making satisfaction among Chinese women facing decision for breast cancer surgery?Patient Educ Couns. 2014 Feb;94(2):243-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.11.006. Epub 2013 Nov 28.PMID: 24316055
- Protocol for a pre-implementation and post-implementation study on shared decision-making in the surgical treatment of women with early-stage breast cancer.BMJ Open. 2015 Mar 31;5(3):e007698. doi: 10.1136/bmjopen-2015-007698.PMID: 25829374 Free PMC article. Clinical Trial.
- Shared decision making in the management of midshaft clavicular fractures: Nonoperative treatment or plate fixation.Injury. 2017 Apr;48(4):920-924. doi: 10.1016/j.injury.2017.02.032. Epub 2017 Feb 27.PMID: 28262280 Clinical Trial.
- Engaging patients in health care decisions in the emergency department through shared decision-making: a systematic review.Acad Emerg Med. 2012 Aug;19(8):959-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1553-2712.2012.01414.x. Epub 2012 Jul 31.PMID: 22853804 Review.
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario