Dataset Information

An RCT of a decision aid to support informed choices about taking aspirin to prevent colorectal cancer and other chronic diseases: a study protocol for the SITA (Should I Take Aspirin?) trial.

ABSTRACT:

Background

Australian guidelines recommend that all people aged 50-70 years old actively consider taking daily low-dose aspirin (100-300 mg per day) for 2.5 to 5 years to reduce their risk of colorectal cancer (CRC). Despite the change of national CRC prevention guidelines, there has been no active implementation of the guidelines into clinical practice. We aim to test the efficacy of a health consultation and decision aid, using a novel expected frequency tree (EFT) to present the benefits and harms of low dose aspirin prior to a general practice consultation with patients aged 50-70 years, on informed decision-making and uptake of aspirin.

Methods

Approximately five to seven general practices in Victoria, Australia, will be recruited to participate. Patients 50-70 years old, attending an appointment with their general practitioner (GP) for any reason, will be invited to participate in the trial. Two hundred fifty-eight eligible participants will be randomly allocated 1:1 to intervention or active control arms using a computer-generated allocation sequence stratified by general practice, sex, and mode of trial delivery (face-to-face or teletrial). There are two co-primary outcomes: informed decision-making at 1-month post randomisation, measured by the Multi-dimensional Measure of Informed Choice (MMIC), and self-reported daily use of aspirin at 6 months. Secondary outcomes include decisional conflict at 1-month and other behavioural changes to reduce CRC risk at both time points.

Discussion

This trial will test the efficacy of novel methods for implementing national guidelines to support informed decision-making about taking aspirin in 50-70-year-olds to reduce the risk of CRC and other chronic diseases.

Trial registration

The Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry (ANZCTR) ACTRN12620001003965 . Registered on 10 October 2020.

SUBMITTER: Milton S

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8280579 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:ObjectiveTo determine whether a decision aid designed for adults with low education and literacy can support informed choice and involvement in decisions about screening for bowel cancer.DesignRandomised controlled trial.SettingAreas in New South Wales, Australia identified as socioeconomically disadvantaged (low education attainment, high unemployment, and unskilled occupations).Participants572 adults aged between 55 and 64 with low educational attainment, eligible for bowel cancer screening.InterventionPatient decision aid comprising a paper based interactive booklet (with and without a question prompt list) and a DVD, presenting quantitative risk information on the possible outcomes of screening using faecal occult blood testing compared with no testing. The control group received standard information developed for the Australian national bowel screening programme. All materials and a faecal occult blood test kit were posted directly to people's homes.Main outcome measuresInformed choice (adequate knowledge and consistency between attitudes and screening behaviour) and preferences for involvement in screening decisions.ResultsParticipants who received the decision aid showed higher levels of knowledge than the controls; the mean score (maximum score 12) for the decision aid group was 6.50 (95% confidence interval 6.15 to 6.84) and for the control group was 4.10 (3.85 to 4.36; P<0.001). Attitudes towards screening were less positive in the decision aid group, with 51% of the participants expressing favourable attitudes compared with 65% of participants in the control group (14% difference, 95% confidence interval 5% to 23%; P=0.002). The participation rate for screening was reduced in the decision aid group: completion of faecal occult blood testing was 59% v 75% in the control group (16% difference, 8% to 24%; P=0.001). The decision aid increased the proportion of participants who made an informed choice, from 12% in the control group to 34% in the decision aid group (22% difference, 15% to 29%; P<0.001). More participants in the decision aid group had no decisional conflict about the screening decision compared with the controls (51% v 38%; P=0.02). The groups did not differ for general anxiety or worry about bowel cancer.ConclusionsTailored decision support information can be effective in supporting informed choices and greater involvement in decisions about faecal occult blood testing among adults with low levels of education, without increasing anxiety or worry about developing bowel cancer. Using a decision aid to make an informed choice may, however, lead to lower uptake of screening. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT00765869 and Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry 12608000011381.

Project description:Tamoxifen and raloxifene are chemopreventive drugs that can reduce women’s relative risk of primary breast cancer by 50%; however, most women eligible for these drugs have chosen not to take them. The reasons for low uptake may be related to women’s knowledge or attitudes towards the drugs. We aimed to examine the impact of an online breast cancer chemoprevention decision aid (DA) on informed intentions and decisions of women at high risk of breast cancer.We conducted a randomized clinical trial, assessing the effect of a DA about breast cancer chemoprevention on informed choices about chemoprevention. Women (n = 585), 46- to 74-years old old, completed online baseline, post-test, and three-month follow-up questionnaires. Participants were randomly assigned to either an intervention group, a standard control group that answered questions about chemoprevention at baseline, or a three-month control group that did not answer questions about chemoprevention at baseline. The main outcome measures were whether women’s intentions and decisions regarding chemoprevention drugs were informed, and whether women who viewed the DA were more likely to make informed decisions than women who did not view the DA, using a dichotomous composite variable ‘informed choice’ (yes/no) to classify informed decisions as those reflecting sufficient knowledge and concordance between a woman’s decision and relevant attitudes.Analyses showed that more intervention than standard control participants (52.7% versus 5.9%) made informed decisions at post-test, P <0.001. At the three-month follow-up, differences in rates of informed choice between intervention (16.9%) and both control groups (11.8% and 8.0%) were statistically non-significant, P = 0.067.The DA increased informed decision making about breast cancer chemoprevention, although the impact on knowledge diminished over time. This study was not designed to determine how much knowledge decision makers must retain over time. Examining informed decisions increases understanding of the impact of DAs. A standard for defining and measuring sufficient knowledge for informed decisions is needed.ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT00967824

Project description:BackgroundDecision aids can support informed choice in mammography screening, but for the German mammography screening programme no systematically evaluated decision aid exists to date. We developed a decision aid for women invited to this programme for the first time based on the criteria of the International Patient Decision Aids Standards Collaboration.ObjectiveTo determine whether a decision aid increases informed choice about mammography screening programme participation.MethodsA representative sample of 7,400 women aged 50 was drawn from registration offices in Westphalia-Lippe, Germany. Women were randomised to receive usual care (i.e., the standard information brochure sent with the programme's invitation letter) or the decision aid. Data were collected online at baseline, post-intervention, and 3 months follow-up. The primary outcome was informed choice. Secondary outcomes were the constituents of informed choice (knowledge, attitude, intention/uptake), decisional conflict, decision regret, and decision stage. Outcomes were analysed using latent structural equation models and χ2-tests.Results1,206 women participated (response rate of 16.3%). The decision aid increased informed choice. Women in the control group had lower odds to make an informed choice at post-intervention (OR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18-0.37) and at follow-up (OR 0.66, 95% CI 0.46-0.94); informed choices remained constant at 30%. This was also reflected in lower knowledge and more decisional conflict. Post-intervention, the uptake intention was higher in the control group, whereas the uptake rate at follow-up was similar. Women in the control group had a more positive attitude at follow-up than women receiving the decision aid. Decision regret and decision stage were not influenced by the intervention.ConclusionThis paper describes the first systematic evaluation of a newly developed decision aid for the German mammography screening programme in a randomised controlled trial. Our decision aid proved to be an effective tool to enhance the rate of informed choice and was made accessible to the public.Trial registrationGerman Clinical Trials Register DRKS00005176.

Project description:BackgroundCystic fibrosis (CF) is a life-limiting genetic disease that causes chronic lung infections. We developed an internet-based decision aid (DA) to help patients with CF make better informed decisions regarding treatments and advance care planning. We built the DA around two major treatment decisions: whether to have a lung transplant and whether to agree to invasive mechanical ventilation (intubation).ObjectiveThis study aims to conduct usability testing of the InformedChoices CF DA among key stakeholder groups.MethodsWe performed a patient needs assessment using think-aloud usability testing with patients with CF, their surrogates, and CF clinicians. Think-aloud participants provided feedback while navigating the DA, and after viewing, they answered surveys. Transcripts from the think-aloud sessions and survey results were categorized into common, generalizable themes and optimizations for improving content, comprehension, and navigation. We assessed the ease of use of the DA (System Usability Scale) and also assessed the participants' perceptions regarding the overall tone, with an emphasis on emotional reactions to the DA content, level of detail, and usefulness of the information for making decisions about either intubation or lung transplantation, including how well they understood the information and were able to apply it to their own decision-making process. We also assessed the DA's ease of navigation, esthetics, and whether participants were able to complete a series of usability tasks (eg, locating specific information in the DA or using the interactive survival estimates calculator) to ensure that the website was easy to navigate during the clinic-based advance care planning discussions.ResultsA total of 12 participants from 3 sites were enrolled from March 9 to August 30, 2018, for the usability testing: 5 CF clinicians (mean age 48.2, SD 12.0 years), 5 adults with CF, and 2 family and surrogate caregivers of people with CF (mean age of CF adults and family and surrogate caregivers 38.8, SD 10.8 years). Among the 12 participants, the average System Usability Scale score for the DA was 88.33 (excellent). Think-aloud analysis identified 3 themes: functionality, visibility and navigation, and content and usefulness. Areas for improvement included reducing repetition, enhancing comprehension, and changing the flow. Several changes to improve the content and usefulness of the DA were recommended, including adding information about alternatives to childbearing, such as adoption and surrogacy. On the basis of survey responses, we found that the navigation of the site was easy for clinicians, patients, and surrogates who participated in usability testing.ConclusionsUsability testing revealed areas of potential improvement. Testing also yielded positive feedback, suggesting the DA's future success. Integrating changes before implementation should improve the DA's comprehension, navigation, and usefulness and lead to greater adoption.