Cargando…
Anticipated regret in shared decision-making: a randomized experimental study
BACKGROUND: Explicit consideration of anticipated regret is not part of the standard shared decision-making protocols. This pilot study aimed to compare decisions about a hypothetical surgery for breast cancer and examined whether regret is a consideration in treatment decisions. METHODS: In this ra...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
BioMed Central
2016
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4776353/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26941952 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13741-016-0031-6 |
_version_ | 1782419137113358336 |
---|---|
author | Speck, Rebecca M. Neuman, Mark D. Resnick, Kimberly S. Mellers, Barbara A. Fleisher, Lee A. |
author_facet | Speck, Rebecca M. Neuman, Mark D. Resnick, Kimberly S. Mellers, Barbara A. Fleisher, Lee A. |
author_sort | Speck, Rebecca M. |
collection | PubMed |
description | BACKGROUND: Explicit consideration of anticipated regret is not part of the standard shared decision-making protocols. This pilot study aimed to compare decisions about a hypothetical surgery for breast cancer and examined whether regret is a consideration in treatment decisions. METHODS: In this randomized experimental study, 184 healthy female volunteers were randomized to receive a standard decision aid (control) or one with information on post-surgical regret (experimental). The main outcome measures were the proportion of subjects choosing lumpectomy vs. mastectomy and the proportion reporting that regret played a role in the decision made. We hypothesized that a greater proportion of the experimental group (regret-incorporated decision aid) would make a surgical treatment preference that favored the less regret-inducing option and that they would be more likely to consider regret in their decision-making process as compared to the control group. RESULTS: A significantly greater proportion of the experimental group subjects reported regret played a role in their decision-making process compared to the control counterparts (78 vs. 65 %; p = 0.039). Recipients of the regret-incorporated experimental decision aid had a threefold increased odds of choosing the less regret-inducing surgery (OR = 2.97; 95 % CI = 1.25, 7.09; p value = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: In this hypothetical context, the incorporation of regret in a decision aid for preference-sensitive surgery impacted decision-making. This finding suggests that keying in on anticipated regret may be an important element of shared decision-making strategies. Our results make a strong argument for applying this design and pursuing further research in a surgical patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02563808. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13741-016-0031-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-4776353 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2016 |
publisher | BioMed Central |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-47763532016-03-04 Anticipated regret in shared decision-making: a randomized experimental study Speck, Rebecca M. Neuman, Mark D. Resnick, Kimberly S. Mellers, Barbara A. Fleisher, Lee A. Perioper Med (Lond) Research BACKGROUND: Explicit consideration of anticipated regret is not part of the standard shared decision-making protocols. This pilot study aimed to compare decisions about a hypothetical surgery for breast cancer and examined whether regret is a consideration in treatment decisions. METHODS: In this randomized experimental study, 184 healthy female volunteers were randomized to receive a standard decision aid (control) or one with information on post-surgical regret (experimental). The main outcome measures were the proportion of subjects choosing lumpectomy vs. mastectomy and the proportion reporting that regret played a role in the decision made. We hypothesized that a greater proportion of the experimental group (regret-incorporated decision aid) would make a surgical treatment preference that favored the less regret-inducing option and that they would be more likely to consider regret in their decision-making process as compared to the control group. RESULTS: A significantly greater proportion of the experimental group subjects reported regret played a role in their decision-making process compared to the control counterparts (78 vs. 65 %; p = 0.039). Recipients of the regret-incorporated experimental decision aid had a threefold increased odds of choosing the less regret-inducing surgery (OR = 2.97; 95 % CI = 1.25, 7.09; p value = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS: In this hypothetical context, the incorporation of regret in a decision aid for preference-sensitive surgery impacted decision-making. This finding suggests that keying in on anticipated regret may be an important element of shared decision-making strategies. Our results make a strong argument for applying this design and pursuing further research in a surgical patient population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02563808. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13741-016-0031-6) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. BioMed Central 2016-03-02 /pmc/articles/PMC4776353/ /pubmed/26941952 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13741-016-0031-6 Text en © Speck et al. 2016 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The Creative Commons Public Domain Dedication waiver (http://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/) applies to the data made available in this article, unless otherwise stated. |
spellingShingle | Research Speck, Rebecca M. Neuman, Mark D. Resnick, Kimberly S. Mellers, Barbara A. Fleisher, Lee A. Anticipated regret in shared decision-making: a randomized experimental study |
title | Anticipated regret in shared decision-making: a randomized experimental study |
title_full | Anticipated regret in shared decision-making: a randomized experimental study |
title_fullStr | Anticipated regret in shared decision-making: a randomized experimental study |
title_full_unstemmed | Anticipated regret in shared decision-making: a randomized experimental study |
title_short | Anticipated regret in shared decision-making: a randomized experimental study |
title_sort | anticipated regret in shared decision-making: a randomized experimental study |
topic | Research |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4776353/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/26941952 http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s13741-016-0031-6 |
work_keys_str_mv | AT speckrebeccam anticipatedregretinshareddecisionmakingarandomizedexperimentalstudy AT neumanmarkd anticipatedregretinshareddecisionmakingarandomizedexperimentalstudy AT resnickkimberlys anticipatedregretinshareddecisionmakingarandomizedexperimentalstudy AT mellersbarbaraa anticipatedregretinshareddecisionmakingarandomizedexperimentalstudy AT fleisherleea anticipatedregretinshareddecisionmakingarandomizedexperimentalstudy |