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...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Speck, Rebecca M., Neuman, Mark D., Resnick, Kimberly S., Mellers, Barbara A., Fleisher, Lee A.
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