Designing a Liver Transplant Patient and Family Decision Support Tool for Organ Offer Decisions.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Background
For liver transplant candidates on the waiting list, deciding to accept a donor organ with known or potential risk factors can be stressful and can lead to declined offers. Current education for patients and family often takes place during transplant evaluations and can be overwhelming and result in low retention and poor understanding of donor quality.Methods
In the first phase, we sought to understand provider experiences when counseling patients about donor risks and donor offers. We conducted interviews and focus groups with liver transplant providers at 1 local center and at a national clinician conference. Twenty providers participated: 15 hepatologists and 5 surgeons. The provider feedback was used to create an initial outline of content that is consistent with decision support frameworks. In a second phase, graphic design collaborators created mockups of a patient-friendly tool. We reviewed mockups with 4 transplant coordinators and 9 liver transplant candidates for feedback on clarity and utility to prepare for an organ offer. Patient responses allowed a comparison of perceived readiness to receive an offer call before and after viewing mockups.Results
We identified themes relating to the offer process, repetition and timing of education, and standardization and tailoring of content. The results indicated a gap in available education after the evaluation session, and information specific to offer decisions is needed. Patient feedback emphasized the need to review the offer process before a real offer.Conclusions
Patients and providers responded favorably to a patient tool addressing existing gaps in education while waiting for a donor offer. Additional patient, family, and provider feedback will guide the development of an interactive tool to prepare patients and families for an offer decision.
SUBMITTER: Schaffhausen CR
PROVIDER: S-EPMC8081471 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Patients in the US in need of a life-saving organ transplant must complete a long process of medical decisions, and a first step is to identify a transplant center to complete an evaluation. This study describes a patient-centered process of testing and refinement of a new website (www.transplantcentersearch.org) that was developed to provide data to patients who are seeking a transplant center. Mixed methods, including online surveys and structured usability testing, were conducted to inform changes in an iterative process. Survey data from 684 participants indicated the effects of different icon styles on user decisions. Qualitative feedback from 38 usability testing participants informed improvements to the website interface. The mixed methods approach was feasible and well suited to the need to address multiple development steps of a patient-facing tool. The combined methods allowed for large survey sample sizes and also allowed interaction with a functioning website and in-depth qualitative discussions. The approach is applicable for a broad range of target user groups who are faced with challenging decisions and a need for information tailored to individual users. The survey and usability testing concluded with a functioning website that is positively received by users and meets the objective to support patient decisions when seeking an organ transplant.
| S-EPMC8128227 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Prior studies have shown that patients are reluctant to accept donor-specific risks, and transplant professionals lack an effective and time-efficient means of obtaining informed consent. We designed and pilot-tested a Web-based patient decision aid (DA) on organ quality. The DA was administered to 53 liver transplant candidates (median Model for End-Stage Liver Disease score?=?14, range?=?7-26), and they took a mean of 15 minutes to complete it. Questions about knowledge and attitudes were asked before and after the DA. Subjects' knowledge improved, with 53% and 60% correctly answering questions about hepatitis B virus and human immunodeficiency virus transmission before the DA and 94% and 100%, respectively, correctly answering them afterward (P?<?0.001). The accuracy of mortality prediction also improved from a mean 3-month mortality estimate of 22% before the DA to 12% afterward (P?<?0.001). After the DA, subjects felt that it was more likely that they might be offered a less-than-perfect liver (P?=?0.001), and they were more likely to consider accepting such a liver (P?<?0.001). In conclusion, implementing a Web-based patient DA is feasible and improves knowledge among liver transplant candidates. The use of this tool may decrease candidates' reluctance to accept extended criteria organs.
| S-EPMC4072737 | biostudies-literature
Project description:We developed a kidney offer acceptance decision tool to predict the probability of graft survival and patient survival for first-time kidney-alone candidates after an offer is accepted or declined, and we characterized the effect of restricting the donor pool with a maximum acceptable kidney donor profile index (KDPI). For accepted offers, Cox proportional hazards models estimated these probabilities using transplanted kidneys. For declined offers, these probabilities were estimated by considering the experience of similar candidates who declined offers and the probability that declining would lead to these outcomes. We randomly selected 5000 declined offers and estimated these probabilities 3 years post-offer had the offers been accepted or declined. Predicted outcomes for declined offers were well calibrated (<3% error) with good predictive accuracy (area under the curve: graft survival, 0.69; patient survival, 0.69). Had the offers been accepted, the probabilities of graft survival and patient survival were typically higher. However, these advantages attenuated or disappeared with higher KDPI, candidate priority, and local donor supply. Donor pool restrictions were associated with worse 3-year outcomes, especially for candidates with high allocation priority. The kidney offer acceptance decision tool could inform offer acceptance by characterizing the potential risk-benefit trade-off associated with accepting or declining an offer.
| S-EPMC5859254 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundUse of electronic clinical decision support (eCDS) has been recommended to improve implementation of clinical decision rules. Many eCDS tools, however, are designed and implemented without taking into account the context in which clinical work is performed. Implementation of the pediatric traumatic brain injury (TBI) clinical decision rule at one Level I pediatric emergency department includes an electronic questionnaire triggered when ordering a head computed tomography using computerized physician order entry (CPOE). Providers use this CPOE tool in less than 20% of trauma resuscitation cases. A human factors engineering approach could identify the implementation barriers that are limiting the use of this tool.ObjectivesThe objective was to design a pediatric TBI eCDS tool for trauma resuscitation using a human factors approach. The hypothesis was that clinical experts will rate a usability-enhanced eCDS tool better than the existing CPOE tool for user interface design and suitability for clinical use.MethodsThis mixed-methods study followed usability evaluation principles. Pediatric emergency physicians were surveyed to identify barriers to using the existing eCDS tool. Using standard trauma resuscitation protocols, a hierarchical task analysis of pediatric TBI evaluation was developed. Five clinical experts, all board-certified pediatric emergency medicine faculty members, then iteratively modified the hierarchical task analysis until reaching consensus. The software team developed a prototype eCDS display using the hierarchical task analysis. Three human factors engineers provided feedback on the prototype through a heuristic evaluation, and the software team refined the eCDS tool using a rapid prototyping process. The eCDS tool then underwent iterative usability evaluations by the five clinical experts using video review of 50 trauma resuscitation cases. A final eCDS tool was created based on their feedback, with content analysis of the evaluations performed to ensure all concerns were identified and addressed.ResultsAmong 26 EPs (76% response rate), the main barriers to using the existing tool were that the information displayed is redundant and does not fit clinical workflow. After the prototype eCDS tool was developed based on the trauma resuscitation hierarchical task analysis, the human factors engineers rated it to be better than the CPOE tool for nine of 10 standard user interface design heuristics on a three-point scale. The eCDS tool was also rated better for clinical use on the same scale, in 84% of 50 expert-video pairs, and was rated equivalent in the remainder. Clinical experts also rated barriers to use of the eCDS tool as being low.ConclusionsAn eCDS tool for diagnostic imaging designed using human factors engineering methods has improved perceived usability among pediatric emergency physicians.
| S-EPMC5338692 | biostudies-literature
Project description:ImportanceUnder the current Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services guidelines, there is incentivization to optimize posttransplant outcomes regardless of mortality among patients on the waitlist and transplant rates; few data exist with regard to transplant center acceptance practices and survival to heart transplant.ObjectivesTo evaluate the extent of variability in organ acceptance practices in the US and whether this center-level behavior is associated with heart transplant candidate survival.Design, setting, and participantsIn this retrospective cohort study, the US National Transplant Registry was queried for all match runs of adult candidates listed for isolated heart transplant between May 1, 2007, and March 31, 2017. Data analysis was conducted from October 30, 2018, to May 1, 2019. The final cohort included 93 transplant centers, 19 703 donors, and 9628 candidates.Main outcomes and measuresCenter acceptance rates for heart allografts offered to the highest-priority candidates, association between center acceptance rate and mortality among patients on the waitlist, and posttransplant outcomes between candidates who accepted their first-rank offers vs those who accepted previously declined offers.ResultsAmong 19 703 unique organ offers, 6302 hearts (32.0%) were accepted for first-rank candidates. After adjustment for donor, candidate, and geographic covariates, transplant centers varied in acceptance rates (12.3%-61.5%) of offers made to first-rank candidates. Higher acceptance rates were associated with lower cumulative incidence of 1-year mortality among patients on the waitlist. For every 10% increase in adjusted center acceptance rate, the risk of mortality decreased by 27% (subdistribution hazard ratio, 0.73; 95% CI, 0.67-0.80). No statistically significant difference was observed in 5-year adjusted posttransplant patient survival (adjusted hazard ratio, 1.02; 95% CI, 0.94-1.11) and graft failure (subdistribution hazard ratio; 0.95; 95% CI, 0.83-1.09) between hearts accepted at the first-rank compared with lower-rank positions.Conclusions and relevanceVariability in heart allograft acceptance rates appears to exist among transplant centers, with candidates listed at lower acceptance rate centers being more likely to experience mortality while on the waitlist. Comparable posttransplant survival suggests that allografts that were declined as a first offer perform as well as those that were accepted at their first offer. These findings suggest that organ acceptance rate or time to transplant from being added to the waitlist may be an additional measure of heart transplant program performance.
| S-EPMC7160742 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe availability of mobile clinical decision support (CDS) tools has grown substantially with the increased prevalence of smartphone devices and apps. Although health care providers express interest in integrating mobile health (mHealth) technologies into their clinical settings, concerns have been raised, including perceived disagreements between information provided by mobile CDS tools and standard guidelines. Despite their potential to transform health care delivery, there remains limited literature on the provider's perspective on the clinical utility of mobile CDS tools for improving patient outcomes, especially in low- and middle-income countries.ObjectiveThis study aims to describe providers' perceptions about the utility of a mobile CDS tool accessed via a smartphone app for diarrhea management in Bangladesh. In addition, feedback was collected on the preliminary components of the mobile CDS tool to address clinicians' concerns and incorporate their preferences.MethodsFrom November to December 2020, qualitative data were gathered through 8 web-based focus group discussions with physicians and nurses from 3 Bangladeshi hospitals. Each discussion was conducted in the local language-Bangla-and audio recorded for transcription and translation by the local research team. Transcripts and codes were entered into NVivo (version 12; QSR International), and applied thematic analysis was used to identify themes that explore the clinical utility of an mHealth app for assessing dehydration severity in patients with acute diarrhea. Summaries of concepts and themes were generated from reviews of the aggregated coded data; thematic memos were written and used for the final analysis.ResultsOf the 27 focus group participants, 14 (52%) were nurses and 13 (48%) were physicians; 15 (56%) worked at a diarrhea specialty hospital and 12 (44%) worked in government district or subdistrict hospitals. Participants' experience in their current position ranged from 2 to 14 years, with an average of 10.3 (SD 9.0) years. Key themes from the qualitative data analysis included current experience with CDS, overall perception of the app's utility and its potential role in clinical care, barriers to and facilitators of app use, considerations of overtreatment and undertreatment, and guidelines for the app's clinical recommendations. Participants felt that the tool would initially take time to use, but once learned, it could be useful during epidemic cholera. Some felt that clinical experience remains an important part of treatment that can be supplemented, but not replaced, by a CDS tool. In addition, diagnostic information, including mid-upper arm circumference and blood pressure, might not be available to directly inform programming decisions.ConclusionsParticipants were positive about the mHealth app and its potential to inform diarrhea management. They provided detailed feedback, which developers used to revise the mobile CDS tool. These formative qualitative data provided timely and relevant feedback to improve the utility of a CDS tool for diarrhea treatment in Bangladesh.
| S-EPMC8994146 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Variation in heart and lung offer acceptance practices may affect numbers of transplanted organs and create variability in waitlist mortality. To investigate these issues, offer acceptance ratios, or adjusted odds ratios, for heart and lung transplant programs individually and for all programs within donation service areas (DSAs) were estimated using offers from donors recovered July 1, 2016, and June 30, 2017. Logistic regressions estimated the association of DSA-level offer acceptance ratios with donor yield and local placement of organs recovered in the DSA. Competing risk methodology estimated the association of program-level offer acceptance ratios with incidence and rate of waitlist removals due to death or becoming too sick to undergo transplant. Higher DSA-level offer acceptance was associated with higher yield (odds ratios [ORs]: lung, 1.04 1.111.19 ; heart, 1.09 1.211.35 ) and more local placement of transplanted organs (ORs: lung, 1.01 1.121.24 ; heart, 1.47 1.691.93 ). Higher program-level offer acceptance was associated with lower incidence of waitlist removal due to death or becoming too sick to undergo transplant (hazard ratios [HRs]: heart, 0.80 0.860.93 ; lung, 0.67 0.750.83 ), but not with rate of waitlist removal (HRs: heart, 0.91 0.981.06 ; lung, 0.89 0.991.10 ). Heart and lung offer acceptance practices affected numbers of transplanted organs and contributed to program-level variability in the probability of waitlist mortality.
| S-EPMC6836691 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Adoption of clinical decision support has been limited. Important barriers include an emphasis on algorithmic approaches to decision support that do not align well with clinical work flow and human decision strategies, and the expense and challenge of developing, implementing, and refining decision support features in existing electronic health records (EHRs). We applied decision-centered design to create a modular software application to support physicians in managing and tracking colorectal cancer screening. Using decision-centered design facilitates a thorough understanding of cognitive support requirements from an end user perspective as a foundation for design. In this project, we used an iterative design process, including ethnographic observation and cognitive task analysis, to move from an initial design concept to a working modular software application called the Screening & Surveillance App. The beta version is tailored to work with the Veterans Health Administration's EHR Computerized Patient Record System (CPRS). Primary care providers using the beta version Screening & Surveillance App more accurately answered questions about patients and found relevant information more quickly compared to those using CPRS alone. Primary care providers also reported reduced mental effort and rated the Screening & Surveillance App positively for usability.
| S-EPMC4784691 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Appropriate thromboprophylaxis for patients with atrial fibrillation or atrial flutter (AF) remains a national challenge. The recent availability of direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) with comparable efficacy and improved safety compared with warfarin alters the balance between risk factors for stroke and benefit of anticoagulation. Our objective was to examine the impact of DOACs as an alternative to warfarin on the net benefit of oral anticoagulant therapy (OAT) in a real-world population of AF patients.This is a retrospective cohort study of patients with paroxysmal or persistent nonvalvular AF. We updated an Atrial Fibrillation Decision Support Tool (AFDST) to include DOACs as treatment options. The tool generates patient-specific recommendations based upon individual patient risk factor profiles for stroke and major bleeding using quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) calculated for each treatment strategy by a decision analytic model. The setting included inpatient and ambulatory sites in an academic health center in the midwestern United States. The study involved 5,121 adults with nonvalvular AF seen for any ambulatory visit or inpatient hospitalization over the 1-year period (January through December 2016). Outcome measure was net clinical benefit in QALYs.When DOACs are a therapeutic option, the AFDST recommends OAT for 4,134 (81%) patients and no antithrombotic therapy or aspirin for 489 (9%). A strong recommendation for OAT could not be made in 498 (10%) patients. When warfarin is the only option, OAT is recommended for 3,228 (63%) patients and no antithrombotic therapy or aspirin for 973 (19%). A strong recommendation for OAT could not be made in 920 (18%) patients. In total, 1,508 QALYs could be gained if treatment were changed to that recommended by the AFDST.Availability of DOACs increases the proportion of patients for whom oral anticoagulation therapy is recommended in a real-world cohort of AF patients and increased projected QALYs by more than 1,500 when all patients are receiving thromboprophylaxis as recommended by the AFDST compared with current treatment.
| S-EPMC5726779 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:Informed consent requires that individuals understand the nature of the study, risks and benefits of participation. Individuals with intellectual disabilities (ID) have cognitive and adaptive impairments that may affect their ability to provide informed consent. New treatments and clinical trials for fragile X syndrome, the most commonly known inherited cause of ID, necessitate the development of methods to improve the informed consent process. The goal of this study was to compare the efficacy of a digital decision support tool with that of standard practice for informed consent and to examine whether the tool can improve decisional capacity for higher functioning individuals. METHODS:Participants (N = 89; mean age = 21.2 years) were allocated to the experimental group (consenting information provided via the digital decision support tool), or the comparison group (information provided via standard practice). Participants were assessed on four aspects of decisional capacity (Understanding, Appreciating, Reasoning, and Expressing a choice). We used regression analyses to test the impact of the tool on each outcome, repeating the analyses on the higher functioning subsample. RESULTS:No differences existed in any domain of decisional capacity for the sample in full. However, participants in the higher IQ subsample who used the tool scored better on Understanding after adjustment (? = 0.25, p = 0.04), but not on Appreciating or Reasoning. No differences by experimental group existed in the decision to join the hypothetical trial for the full sample or higher functioning subsample. CONCLUSIONS:A decision support tool shows promise for individuals with fragile X syndrome with higher cognitive abilities. Future studies should examine the level of cognitive ability needed for sufficient understanding, whether these findings can be translated to other clinical populations, and the impact of the tool in larger trials and on trial retention.
| S-EPMC6808417 | biostudies-literature