Dataset Information

Association of Decision-making with Patients' Perceptions of Care and Knowledge during Longitudinal Pulmonary Nodule Surveillance.

ABSTRACT: RATIONALE:Patient participation in medical decision-making is widely advocated, but outcomes are inconsistent. OBJECTIVES:We examined the associations between medical decision-making roles, and patients' perceptions of their care and knowledge while undergoing pulmonary nodule surveillance. METHODS:The study setting was an academically affiliated Veterans Affairs hospital network in which 121 participants had 319 decision-making encounters. The Control Preferences Scale was used to assess patients' decision-making roles. Associations between decision-making, including role concordance (i.e., agreement between patients' preferred and actual roles), shared decision-making (SDM), and perceptions of care and knowledge, were assessed using logistic regression and generalized estimating equations. RESULTS:Participants had a preferred role in 98% of encounters, and most desired an active role (shared or patient controlled). For some encounters (36%), patients did not report their actual decision-making role, because they did not know what their role was. Role concordance and SDM occurred in 56% and 26% of encounters, respectively. Role concordance was associated with greater satisfaction with medical care (adjusted odds ratio [Adj-OR], 5.39; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.68-17.26), higher quality of patient-reported care (Adj-OR, 2.86; 95% CI, 1.31-6.27), and more disagreement that care could be better (Adj-OR, 2.16; 95% CI, 1.12-4.16). Role concordance was not associated with improved pulmonary nodule knowledge with respect to lung cancer risk (Adj-OR, 1.12; 95% CI, 0.63-2.00) or nodule information received (Adj-OR, 1.13; 95% CI, 0.31-4.13). SDM was not associated with perceptions of care or knowledge. CONCLUSIONS:Among patients undergoing longitudinal nodule surveillance, a majority had a preference for having active roles in decision-making. Interestingly, during some encounters, patients did not know what their role was or that a decision was being made. Role concordance was associated with greater patient-reported satisfaction and quality of medical care, but not with improved knowledge. Patient participation in decision-making may influence perceptions of care; however, clinicians may need to focus on other communication strategies or domains to improve patient knowledge and health outcomes.

SUBMITTER: Sullivan DR

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5711278 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Association of Decision-making with Patients' Perceptions of Care and Knowledge during Longitudinal Pulmonary Nodule Surveillance.

Sullivan Donald R DR Golden Sara E SE Ganzini Linda L Wiener Renda Soylemez RS Eden Karen B KB Slatore Christopher G CG

Annals of the American Thoracic Society 20171101 11

<h4>Rationale</h4>Patient participation in medical decision-making is widely advocated, but outcomes are inconsistent.<h4>Objectives</h4>We examined the associations between medical decision-making roles, and patients' perceptions of their care and knowledge while undergoing pulmonary nodule surveillance.<h4>Methods</h4>The study setting was an academically affiliated Veterans Affairs hospital network in which 121 participants had 319 decision-making encounters. The Control Preferences Scale was ...[more]

PMID: 28489453

Similar Datasets

Project description:RationaleGuidelines for pulmonary nodule evaluation suggest a variety of strategies, reflecting the lack of high-quality evidence demonstrating the superiority of any one approach. It is unclear whether clinicians agree that multiple management options are appropriate at different levels of risk and whether this impacts their decision-making approaches with patients.ObjectivesTo assess clinicians' perceptions of the appropriateness of various diagnostic strategies, approach to decision-making, and perceived clinical equipoise in pulmonary nodule evaluation.MethodsWe developed and administered a web-based survey in March and April, 2014 to clinician members of the American Thoracic Society. The primary outcome was perceived appropriateness of pulmonary nodule evaluation strategies in three clinical vignettes with different malignancy risk. We compared responses to guideline recommendations and analyzed clinician characteristics associated with a reported shared decision-making approach. We also assessed clinicians' likelihood to enroll patients in hypothetical randomized trials comparing nodule evaluation strategies.ResultsOf 5,872 American Thoracic Society members e-mailed, 1,444 opened the e-mail and 428 eligible clinicians participated in the survey (response rate, 30.0% among those who opened the invitation; 7% overall). The mean number of options considered appropriate increased with pretest probability of cancer, ranging from 1.8 (SD, 1.2) for the low-risk case to 3.5 (1.1) for the high-risk case (P < 0.0001). As recommended by guidelines, the proportion that deemed surgical resection as an appropriate option also increased with cancer risk (P < 0.0001). One-half of clinicians (50.4%) reported engaging in shared decision-making with patients for pulmonary nodule management; this was more commonly reported by clinicians with more years of experience (P = 0.01) and those who reported greater comfort in managing pulmonary nodules (P = 0.005). Although one-half (49.9%) deemed the evidence for pulmonary nodule evaluation to be strong, most clinicians were willing to enroll patients in randomized trials to compare nodule management strategies in all risk categories (low risk, 87.6%; moderate risk, 89.7%; high risk, 63.0%).ConclusionsConsistent with guideline recommendations, clinicians embrace multiple options for pulmonary nodule evaluation and many are open to shared decision-making. Clinicians support the need for randomized clinical trials to strengthen the evidence for nodule evaluation, which will further improve decision-making.

Project description:BackgroundNon-invasive prenatal testing (NIPT) allows women to access genetic information about their fetuses without the physical risk inherent to prior testing methods. The advent of NIPT technology has led to concerns regarding the quality and process of informed consent, as a view of NIPT as "routine" could impair women's considered approach when choosing to undergo testing. Prior studies evaluating NIPT decision-making have focused on the clinical encounter as the primary environment for acquisition of biomedical information and decision formation. While important, this conceptualization fails to consider how additional sources of knowledge, including embodied and empathetic experiential knowledge, shape perceptions of risk and the societal use of NIPT.MethodsIn order to address this issue, qualitative, semi-structured interviews with 25 women who had been offered NIPT were performed. Participants came from a well-resourced, rural setting near a major academic medical center in the US. Women were categorized by NIPT use/non-use as well as whether their described decision-making process was perceived as making a significant decision requiring contemplation ("significant") versus a rapid or immediate decision ("routinized"). A constructivist general inductive approach was used to explore themes in the data, develop a framework of NIPT decision-making, and compare the perceptions of women with differential decision-making processes and outcomes.ResultsA framework for decision-making regarding NIPT was developed based on three emergent factors: perceptions of the societal use of NIPT, expected emotional impact of genetic information, and perceived utility of genetic information. Analysis revealed that perceptions of widespread use of NIPT, pervasive societal narratives of NIPT use as "forward-thinking," and a perception of information as anxiety-relieving contributed to routinized uptake of NIPT. In contrast, women who displayed a lack of routinization expressed fewer stereotypes regarding the audience for NIPT and relied on communication with their social networks to consider how they might use the information provided by NIPT.ConclusionsThe findings of this study reveal the societal narratives and perceptions that shape differential decision-making regarding NIPT in the U.S.ContextUnderstanding and addressing these perceptions that influence NIPT decision-making, especially routinized uptake of NIPT, is important as the use and scope of this technology increases.

Project description:BackgroundDetecting new pulmonary metastases by comparing serial computed tomography (CT) scans is crucial, but a repetitive and time-consuming task that burdens the radiologists' workload. This study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of a nodule-matching algorithm with deep learning-based computer-aided detection (DL-CAD) in diagnosing new pulmonary metastases on cancer surveillance CT scans.MethodsAmong patients who underwent pulmonary metastasectomy between 2014 and 2018, 65 new pulmonary metastases missed by interpreting radiologists on cancer surveillance CT (Time 2) were identified after a retrospective comparison with the previous CT (Time 1). First, DL-CAD detected nodules in Time 1 and Time 2 CT images. All nodules detected at Time 2 were initially considered metastasis candidates. Second, the nodule-matching algorithm was used to assess the correlation between the nodules from the two CT scans and to classify the nodules at Time 2 as "new" or "pre-existing". Pre-existing nodules were excluded from metastasis candidates. We evaluated the performance of DL-CAD with the nodule-matching algorithm, based on its sensitivity, false-metastasis candidates per scan, and positive predictive value (PPV).ResultsA total of 475 lesions were detected by DL-CAD at Time 2. Following a radiologist review, the lesions were categorized as metastases (n=54), benign nodules (n=392), and non-nodules (n=29). Upon comparison of nodules at Time 1 and 2 using the nodule-matching algorithm, all metastases were classified as new nodules without any matching errors. Out of 421 benign lesions, 202 (48.0%) were identified as pre-existing and subsequently excluded from the pool of metastasis candidates through the nodule-matching algorithm. As a result, false-metastasis candidates per CT scan decreased by 47.9% (from 7.1 to 3.7, P<0.001) and the PPV increased from 11.4% to 19.8% (P<0.001), while maintaining sensitivity.ConclusionsThe nodule-matching algorithm improves the diagnostic performance of DL-CAD for new pulmonary metastases, by lowering the number of false-metastasis candidates without compromising sensitivity.

Project description:ObjectiveThe objective of this study was to examine effectiveness of codesigned quality-improving interventions with a multidisciplinary team (MDT) with high workload and prolonged meetings to ascertain: (1) presence and impact of decision-making (DM) fatigue on team performance in the weekly MDT meeting and (2) impact of a short meeting break as a countermeasure of DM fatigue.Design and interventionsThis is a longitudinal multiphase study with a codesigned intervention bundle assessed within team audit and feedback cycles. The interventions comprised short meeting breaks, as well as change of room layout and appointing a meeting chair.Setting and participantsA breast cancer MDT with 15 members was recruited between 2013 and 2015 from a teaching hospital of the London (UK) metropolitan area.MeasuresA validated observational tool (Metric for the Observation of Decision-making) was used by trained raters to assess quality of DM during 1335 patient reviews. The tool scores quality of information and team contributions to reviews by individual disciplines (Likert-based scores), which represent our two primary outcome measures.ResultsData were analysed using multivariate analysis of variance. DM fatigue was present in the MDT meetings: quality of information (M=16.36?to M=15.10) and contribution scores (M=27.67?to M=21.52) declined from first to second half of meetings at baseline. Of the improvement bundle, we found breaks reduced the effect of fatigue: following introduction of breaks (but not other interventions) information quality remained stable between first and second half of meetings (M=16.00?to M=15.94), and contributions to team DM improved overall (M=17.66?to M=19.85).ConclusionQuality of cancer team DM is affected by fatigue due to sequential case review over often prolonged periods of time. This detrimental effect can be reversed by introducing a break in the middle of the meeting. The study offers a methodology based on 'team audit and feedback' principle for codesigning interventions to improve teamwork in cancer care.

Dataset Information

Association of Decision-making with Patients' Perceptions of Care and Knowledge during Longitudinal Pulmonary Nodule Surveillance.

Publications

Association of Decision-making with Patients' Perceptions of Care and Knowledge during Longitudinal Pulmonary Nodule Surveillance.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets