Factors Associated with Decision Aid Use in Localized Prostate Cancer.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT: Purpose
Decision aids have been found to improve patients' knowledge of treatments and decrease decisional regrets. Despite these benefits, there is not widespread use of decision aids for newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa). This analysis investigates factors that impact men's choice to use a decision aid for newly diagnosed prostate cancer.Materials and methods
This is a retrospective analysis of a PCa registry from the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC). We included data from men with newly diagnosed, clinically localized PCa seen from 2018-21 at practices offering a PCa decision aid (Personal Patient Profile-Prostate; P3P). The primary outcome was men's registration to use P3P. We fit a multilevel logistic regression model with patient-level factors and included urologist specific random intercepts. We estimated the intra-class correlation (ICC) and predicted the probability of P3P registration among urologists.Results
A total of 2629 men were seen at practices that participated in P3P and 1174 (45%) registered to use P3P. Forty-one percent of the total variance of P3P registration was attributed to clustering of men under a specific urologist's care. In contrast, only 1.5% of the variance of P3P registration was explained by patient factors. Our model did not include data on socioeconomic, literacy or psychosocial factors, which limits the interpretation of the results.Conclusions
These results suggest that urologists' effect far outweighs patient factors in a man's decision to enroll in P3P. Strategies that encourage providers to increase decision aid adoption in their practices are warranted.
SUBMITTER: Lane GI
PROVIDER: S-EPMC9205471 | biostudies-literature | 2022 Jan
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Publications
Factors Associated with Decision Aid Use in Localized Prostate Cancer.
Lane Giulia I GI Dupati Ajith A Qi Ji J Ferrante Stephanie S Dunn Rodney L RL Paudel Roshan R Paudel Roshan R Wittmann Daniela D Wallner Lauren L Berry Donna L DL Ellimoottil Chad C Montie James J Clemens J Quentin JQ
Urology practice 20220101 1
<h4>Purpose</h4>Decision aids have been found to improve patients' knowledge of treatments and decrease decisional regrets. Despite these benefits, there is not widespread use of decision aids for newly diagnosed prostate cancer (PCa). This analysis investigates factors that impact men's choice to use a decision aid for newly diagnosed prostate cancer.<h4>Materials and methods</h4>This is a retrospective analysis of a PCa registry from the Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (M ...[more]
Similar Datasets
Project description:BackgroundDecision Aids (DAs) effectively translate medical evidence for patients but are not routinely used in clinical practice. Little is known about how DAs are used during patient-clinician encounters.ObjectiveTo characterize the content and communicative function of high-quality DAs during diagnostic clinic visits for prostate cancer.Participants252 men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who had received a DA, 45 treating physicians at 4 US Veterans Administration urology clinics.MethodsQualitative analysis of transcribed audio recordings was used to inductively develop categories capturing content and function of all direct references to DAs (booklet talk). The presence or absence of any booklet talk per transcript was also calculated.ResultsBooklet talk occurred in 55% of transcripts. Content focused on surgical procedures (36%); treatment choice (22%); and clarifying risk classification (17%). The most common function of booklet talk was patient corroboration of physicians' explanations (42%), followed by either physician or patient acknowledgement that the patient had the booklet. Codes reflected the absence of DA use for shared decision-making. In regression analysis, predictors of booklet talk were fewer years of patient education (P = .027) and more time in the encounter (P = .027). Patient race, DA type, time reading the DA, physician informing quality and physician age did not predict booklet talk.ConclusionsResults show that good decision aids, systematically provided to patients, appeared to function not to open up deliberations about how to balance benefits and harms of competing treatments, but rather to allow patients to ask narrow technical questions about recommended treatments.
| S-EPMC5750733 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background. Men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (LPC) often face a dilemma in choosing between available treatment options that have similar survival rates but for which the perceived advantages and disadvantages of each treatment differ. The Navigate decision aid was created to assist Australian men with LPC in making informed decisions about treatment that align with their personal values and preferences. Navigate presents current, unbiased information, including an interactive values clarification exercise. Objective. This study was a qualitative investigation of men's treatment decision making for LPC, and their experiences using the Navigate Web site, to identify areas for improvement and inform implementation. Methods. Semi-structured interviews were conducted with 20 men diagnosed with LPC who completed the intervention arm of the Navigate randomized controlled trial. Interview transcripts were thematically analyzed. Results: Five main themes emerged: 1) diagnosis experiences varied, although men were strongly influenced by their clinician to make an early initial treatment decision; 2) men sought resources and support they trusted; 3) men valued Navigate's multiformatted content and design; 4) men suggested more content was needed on a) the diagnosis journey and b) new treatment updates; and 5) men identified design flaws in the values clarification exercise on Navigate but appreciated the tool being available. Conclusions. Specialist authority influenced men to make an early treatment decision. However, Navigate was helpful in supporting men's ongoing treatment decision making, particularly men on active surveillance who may face further treatment decisions if their cancer progresses. To gain trust and improve engagement from Navigate users, credentials and sources of information need to be prominent. Trustworthiness, timing of access, and the clinician's role in empowering men to use available decision aids are crucial elements to be considered when implementing Navigate in clinical settings.HighlightsThe Navigate decision aid Web site was created to help Australian men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer (LPC) make an informed decision about their treatment.Navigate was helpful in supporting men's ongoing treatment decision making for LPC.Men's treatment decision making for LPC was greatly influenced by perceived authority and trust in their clinician.Trustworthiness, timing of access, and the clinician's role in empowering men to use available decision aids are crucial.
| S-EPMC10501076 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundMen with localized prostate cancer often have unrealistic expectations. Practitioners are poor judges of men's preferences, contributing to preference misdiagnosis and unwarranted practice variation. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) can support men with decisions about localized prostate cancer. This is a comparative case study of two strategies for implementing PtDAs in clinical pathways for men with localized prostate cancer, evaluating (a) PtDA use; (b) impact on men, practitioners, and health system outcomes; and (c) factors influencing sustained use.Methods/designGuided by the Knowledge to Action Framework, this comparative case study will be conducted using administrative data, interviews, and surveys. Cases will be bound by geographic location (one hospital in Ontario; province of Saskatchewan) and time. Eligible participants will be all men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer, with outcomes assessed using administrative data and interviews. Nurses, urologists, radiation oncologists, and managers will be surveyed and a smaller sample interviewed. Cases will be established for each setting with findings compared across cases. Changes in the proportions of men given the PtDA over 2 years will be determined from administrative data. Factors associated with receiving the PtDA will be explored using multivariable logistic regression analysis. To assess the impact of the PtDA, outcomes will be described using mean and standard deviation (men's decisional conflict) and frequency and proportions (practitioners consulted, uptake of treatment). To estimate the effect of the PtDA on these outcomes, adjusted mean differences and odds ratios will be calculated using exploratory multivariable general linear regression and binary or multinomial logistic regression. Factors influencing sustained PtDA use will be assessed using descriptive analysis of survey findings and thematic analysis of interview transcripts.DiscussionDetermining how to embed PtDAs effectively within clinical pathways for men with localized prostate cancer is essential. PtDAs have the potential to strengthen men's active role in making prostate cancer decisions, enhance uptake of shared decision-making by practitioners, and reduce practice variation. Our team of researchers and knowledge users will use findings to improve current PtDA use and consider scaling-up implementation.
| S-EPMC4930601 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundThe American Urological Association White Paper on Implementation of Shared Decision Making (SDM) into Urological Practice suggested SDM represents the state of the art in counseling for patients who are faced with difficult or uncertain medical decisions. The Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) implemented a decision aid, Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P), in 2018 to help newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients make shared decisions with their clinicians. We conducted a qualitative study to assess statewide implementation of P3P throughout MUSIC.MethodsWe recruited urologists and staff from 17 MUSIC practices (8 implementation and 9 comparator practices) to understand how practices engaged patients on treatment discussions and to assess facilitators and barriers to implementing P3P. Interview guides were developed based on the Tailored Interventions for Chronic Disease (TICD) Framework. Interviews were transcribed for analysis and coded independently by two investigators in NVivo, PRO 12. Additionally, quantitative program data were integrated into thematic analyses.ResultsWe interviewed 15 urologists and 11 staff from 16 practices. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts indicated three key themes including the following: (i) P3P is compatible as a SDM tool as over 80% of implementation urologists asked patients to complete the P3P questionnaire routinely and used P3P reports during treatment discussions; (ii) patient receptivity was demonstrated by 370 (50%) of newly diagnosed patients (n = 737) from 8 practices enrolled in P3P with 78% completion rate, which accounts for 39% of all newly diagnosed patients in these practices; and (iii) urologists' attitudes towards SDM varied. Over a third of urologists stated they did not rely on a decision aid. Comparator practices indicated habit, inertia, or concerns about clinic flow as reasons for not adopting P3P and some were unconvinced a decision aid is needed in their practice.ConclusionUrologists and staff affiliated with MUSIC implementation sites indicated that P3P focuses the treatment discussion on items that are important to patients. Experiences of implementation practices indicate that once initiated, there were no negative effects on clinic flow and urologists indicated P3P saves time during patient counseling, as patients were better prepared for focused discussions. Lack of awareness, personal habits, and inertia are reasons for not implementing P3P among the comparator practices.
| S-EPMC7936475 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Background and objectivesThe objectives of this study are to identify patterns of hearing aid usage among U.S. National Health & Aging Trends Study (NHATS) participants and to examine users' characteristics associated with each pattern.Research design and methodsUsing data from 666 adults ages 65 and above from NHATS, we analyzed individuals' self-reported hearing aid use from eight waves of data, 2011-2018, using group-based trajectory modeling to identify clusters of individuals with similar utilization patterns of use over time. Potential risk factors associated with membership to a specific group included baseline sociodemographic characteristics, problems with activities of daily living, presence of a caregiver, and experiencing problems with their hearing aid. We compute and analyze the odds ratios between individuals' baseline characteristics and group membership.ResultsWe identified three utilization group patterns: continued use (n = 510, 76.6%), interrupted use (n = 121, 18.2%), and ceased use (n = 35, 5.2%). Individuals with an income under the poverty line had 2.9 (95% CI: 1.09, 7.75) and 2.7 times (95% CI: 1.38, 5.27) the odds of being in the interrupted and ceased use group, respectively, compared with the continued use group. Other risk factors for interrupted and ceased use included lower education and having a caregiver.Discussion and implicationsNearly a quarter of hearing aid users experience interrupted or ceased use of hearing aids. Socioeconomic factors, such as age, income, and education, may be relevant for how individuals use assistive medical devices over time and could inform policymakers to support maintained use of hearing aids.
| S-EPMC10941315 | biostudies-literature
Project description:PurposeFocal therapies (FTs) are investigated within prospective studies on selected patients treated for localized prostate cancer (PCa). Benefits are preservation of genitourinary function and reduced complications, but follow-up is elaborate and is associated with uncertainty as cancer-free survival appears to be lower compared to standard radical treatments. The aim of this study was to analyse patient-reported acceptance of FT and evaluate factors associated with treatment decision regret.Methods52 patients who received focal high-intensity focused ultrasound for low- to intermediate-risk PCa between 2014 and 2019 within two prospective trials were eligible for a survey regarding PCa-related treatment regret and quality-of-life (Clark's scale) and the following potential predictors: sociodemographic variables, Charlson Comorbidity Index, subjective aging (AARC-10 SF), and general health-related quality-of-life (SF-12). Cancer persistence/recurrence (multiparametric MRI and fusion biopsy after 12 months) and functional outcomes (EPIC-26 UI/UIO/S) data were also included in this study.ResultsThe overall survey response rate was 92.3% (48/52 patients). Median follow-up was 38 months (interquartile range = 25-50 months). In total, ten patients (20.8%) reported treatment decision regret. In univariable analyses, a clinically meaningful increase in urinary incontinence showed a significant association (OR 4.43; 95% CI 0.99-20.53; p = 0.049) with regret. Cancer recurrence (OR 12.31; 95% CI 1.78-159.26; p = 0.023) and general health worry as a domain of Clark's scale (OR 1.07; 95% CI 1.03-1.14; p < 0.01) were predictors of regret in a multivariable logistic regression model (AUC = 0.892).ConclusionAcceptance of FT is comparable to standard treatments. Extensive follow-up including regular PSA testing does not cause additional regret but careful patient selection and information before FT is crucial.
| S-EPMC8124049 | biostudies-literature
Project description:IntroductionDecision aids for breast cancer screening are increasingly being used by physicians, but the association between physician practice decision-aid use and mammography rates remains uncertain. Using national data, this study examines the association between practice-level decision-aid use and mammography use among older women.MethodsPhysician practice responses to the 2017/2018 National Survey of Healthcare Organizations and Systems (n=1,236) were linked to 2016 and 2017 Medicare fee-for-service beneficiary data from eligible beneficiaries (n=439,684) aged 65-74 years. In 2021, multivariable generalized linear models estimated the association of practice decision-aid use for breast cancer screening and advanced health information technology functions with mammography use, controlling for practice and beneficiary characteristics.ResultsOverall, 60.1% of eligible beneficiaries had a screening mammogram, and 37.3% of physician practices routinely used decision aids for breast cancer screening. In adjusted analyses, advanced health information technology functions (OR=1.19, p=0.04) were associated with mammography use, but practice use of decision aids was not (OR=0.95, p=0.21). Beneficiary clinical and socioeconomic characteristics, including race, comorbidities, Medicare and Medicaid eligibility, and median household income were more strongly associated with mammography use than practice-level decision-aid use or advanced health information technology functions.ConclusionsHealth information technology‒enabled automation of mammography reminders and other advanced health information technology functions may support mammography, whereas breast cancer decision aids may reduce patients' propensities to be screened through the alignment of their preferences and screening decision. More resources may be needed for decision aids to be routinely implemented to improve solicitation of patient preferences and targeting of mammography services.
| S-EPMC9509405 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundProstate-specific antigen-based routine screening is not recommended for the general population due to conflicting results with mortality reduction. We aimed to develop a web-based decision aid (DA) for informed decision making for prostate cancer screening.MethodsUsing the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) development process model, we developed our DA based on patient and clinician interviews and multidisciplinary expert discussions. The prototype consisted of predicting individual prostate cancer risk and informed decision-making, including knowledge, risk and benefit, cost, personal value, and decision making. We conducted a pilot study on 101 healthy men, evaluating the effectiveness of DA by measuring knowledge, attitude, and intention to screen before and after using the DA, as well as decisional conflict and usefulness after using the DA.ResultsOf the 101 participants (median age 60 [50-69] years), 84% had not undergone screening for prostate cancer in the past two years. After using the DA, knowledge on prostate cancer screening increased (mean score [of 10] before versus after: 6.85 ± 1.03 versus 7.57 ± 1.25; P < 0.001), and intention to not screen increased from 27.7% to 51.5% (P < 0.001), but attitude toward screening did not change (P = 0.564). After use of the DA, 79 participants reported no decisional conflict, and the usefulness score was high (mean score [of 100] 77.35 ± 7.69), with 85% of participants reporting that the DA helped with decision making.ConclusionOur web-based DA yielded increased knowledge, decreased screening intention, and high perceived usefulness. These findings indicate potential clinical relevance, especially among younger individuals.
| S-EPMC10681842 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundTelomeres play important roles in cancer initiation and progression. The aim of this study is to investigate whether leukocyte telomere length (LTL) is associated with aggressive prostate cancer (PCa).MethodsWe measured relative LTL in a cohort of 1,889 white PCa patients who were treated and followed up at the University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center and assessed its associations with aggressive disease characteristics at diagnosis and biochemical recurrence (BCR) after active treatments (radical prostatectomy and radiotherapy). We further used a Mendelian randomization (MR) approach to compute a weighted genetic risk score (GRS) predictive of LTL using 10 established LTL-associated genetic variants and determined whether this GRS is associated with aggressive PCa.FindingsLTL was significantly shorter in patients with higher Gleason scores at diagnosis. Dichotomized at the median value of LTL, patients with short LTL exhibited a 2.74-fold (95% confidence interval, 1.79-4.18, P = 3.11 × 10-6) increased risk of presenting with GS≥8 disease than those with long LTL in multivariate logistic regression analysis. Moreover, shorter LTL was significantly associated with an increased risk of BCR (hazard ratio = 1.53, 95% confidence interval, 1.01-2.34) compared to longer LTL in localized patients receiving prostatectomy or radiotherapy with a significant dose-response association (P for trend = 0.017) in multivariate Cox proportional hazards regression analysis. In MR analysis, genetically predicted short LTL was also associated with an increased risk of BCR (HR=1.73, 95% CI, 1.08-2.78).InterpretationOur results showed for the first time that LTL was shorter in PCa patients with high Gleason scores and that short LTL and genetically predicted short LTL are associated with worse prognosis in PCa patients receiving prostatectomy or radiotherapy.FundingCancer Prevention and Research Institute of Texas (CPRIT) grant (RP140556), National Cancer Institute Specialized Program of Research Excellence (SPORE) grant (CA140388), and MD Anderson Cancer Center start-up fund.
| S-EPMC6992931 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundPatient decision aids (PDAs) can support the treatment decision making process and empower patients to take a proactive role in their treatment pathway while using a shared decision-making (SDM) approach making participatory medicine possible. The aim of this study was to develop a PDA for prostate cancer that is accurate and user-friendly.MethodsWe followed a user-centered design process consisting of five rounds of semi-structured interviews and usability surveys with topics such as informational/decisional needs of users and requirements for PDAs. Our user-base consisted of 8 urologists, 4 radiation oncologists, 2 oncology nurses, 8 general practitioners, 19 former prostate cancer patients, 4 usability experts and 11 healthy volunteers.ResultsInformational needs for patients centered on three key factors: treatment experience, post-treatment quality of life, and the impact of side effects. Patients and clinicians valued a PDA that presents balanced information on these factors through simple understandable language and visual aids. Usability questionnaires revealed that patients were more satisfied overall with the PDA than clinicians; however, both groups had concerns that the PDA might lengthen consultation times (42 and 41%, respectively). The PDA is accessible on http://beslissamen.nl/ .ConclusionsUser-centered design provided valuable insights into PDA requirements but challenges in integrating diverse perspectives as clinicians focus on clinical outcomes while patients also consider quality of life. Nevertheless, it is crucial to involve a broad base of clinical users in order to better understand the decision-making process and to develop a PDA that is accurate, usable, and acceptable.
| S-EPMC6624887 | biostudies-literature