Cargando…

Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review

PURPOSE: Decision aids (DAs) support patients in shared decision-making by providing balanced evidence-based treatment information and eliciting patients’ preferences. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the quality and communicative aspects of DAs for women diagnosed with early-stag...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Vromans, Ruben, Tenfelde, Kim, Pauws, Steffen, van Eenbergen, Mies, Mares-Engelberts, Ingeborg, Velikova, Galina, van de Poll-Franse, Lonneke, Krahmer, Emiel
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer US 2019
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6790198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31342311
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05351-4
_version_ 1783458753748664320
author Vromans, Ruben
Tenfelde, Kim
Pauws, Steffen
van Eenbergen, Mies
Mares-Engelberts, Ingeborg
Velikova, Galina
van de Poll-Franse, Lonneke
Krahmer, Emiel
author_facet Vromans, Ruben
Tenfelde, Kim
Pauws, Steffen
van Eenbergen, Mies
Mares-Engelberts, Ingeborg
Velikova, Galina
van de Poll-Franse, Lonneke
Krahmer, Emiel
author_sort Vromans, Ruben
collection PubMed
description PURPOSE: Decision aids (DAs) support patients in shared decision-making by providing balanced evidence-based treatment information and eliciting patients’ preferences. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the quality and communicative aspects of DAs for women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: Twenty-one currently available patient DAs were identified through both published literature (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO) and online sources. The DAs were reviewed for their quality by using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) checklist, and subsequently assessed to what extent they paid attention to various communicative aspects, including (i) information presentation, (ii) personalization, (iii) interaction, (iv) information control, (v) accessibility, (vi) suitability, and (vii) source of information. RESULTS: The quality of the DAs varied substantially, with many failing to comply with all components of the IPDAS criteria (mean IPDAS score = 64%, range 31–92%). Five aids (24%) did not include any probability information, 10 (48%) presented multimodal descriptions of outcome probabilities (combining words, numbers, and visual aids), and only 2 (10%) provided personalized treatment outcomes based on patients and tumor characteristics. About half (12; 57%) used interaction methods for eliciting patients’ preferences, 16 (76%) were too lengthy, and 5 (24%) were not fully accessible. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the limited adherence to the IPDAS checklist, our findings suggest that communicative aspects receive even less attention. Future patient DA developments for breast cancer treatment should include communicative aspects that could influence the uptake of DAs in daily clinical practice. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-019-05351-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6790198
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2019
publisher Springer US
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-67901982019-10-17 Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review Vromans, Ruben Tenfelde, Kim Pauws, Steffen van Eenbergen, Mies Mares-Engelberts, Ingeborg Velikova, Galina van de Poll-Franse, Lonneke Krahmer, Emiel Breast Cancer Res Treat Review PURPOSE: Decision aids (DAs) support patients in shared decision-making by providing balanced evidence-based treatment information and eliciting patients’ preferences. The purpose of this systematic review was to assess the quality and communicative aspects of DAs for women diagnosed with early-stage breast cancer. METHODS: Twenty-one currently available patient DAs were identified through both published literature (MEDLINE, Embase, CINAHL, CENTRAL, and PsycINFO) and online sources. The DAs were reviewed for their quality by using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards (IPDAS) checklist, and subsequently assessed to what extent they paid attention to various communicative aspects, including (i) information presentation, (ii) personalization, (iii) interaction, (iv) information control, (v) accessibility, (vi) suitability, and (vii) source of information. RESULTS: The quality of the DAs varied substantially, with many failing to comply with all components of the IPDAS criteria (mean IPDAS score = 64%, range 31–92%). Five aids (24%) did not include any probability information, 10 (48%) presented multimodal descriptions of outcome probabilities (combining words, numbers, and visual aids), and only 2 (10%) provided personalized treatment outcomes based on patients and tumor characteristics. About half (12; 57%) used interaction methods for eliciting patients’ preferences, 16 (76%) were too lengthy, and 5 (24%) were not fully accessible. CONCLUSIONS: In addition to the limited adherence to the IPDAS checklist, our findings suggest that communicative aspects receive even less attention. Future patient DA developments for breast cancer treatment should include communicative aspects that could influence the uptake of DAs in daily clinical practice. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s10549-019-05351-4) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer US 2019-07-24 2019 /pmc/articles/PMC6790198/ /pubmed/31342311 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05351-4 Text en © The Author(s) 2019 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.
spellingShingle Review
Vromans, Ruben
Tenfelde, Kim
Pauws, Steffen
van Eenbergen, Mies
Mares-Engelberts, Ingeborg
Velikova, Galina
van de Poll-Franse, Lonneke
Krahmer, Emiel
Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review
title Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review
title_full Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review
title_fullStr Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review
title_full_unstemmed Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review
title_short Assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review
title_sort assessing the quality and communicative aspects of patient decision aids for early-stage breast cancer treatment: a systematic review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6790198/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/31342311
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s10549-019-05351-4
work_keys_str_mv AT vromansruben assessingthequalityandcommunicativeaspectsofpatientdecisionaidsforearlystagebreastcancertreatmentasystematicreview
AT tenfeldekim assessingthequalityandcommunicativeaspectsofpatientdecisionaidsforearlystagebreastcancertreatmentasystematicreview
AT pauwssteffen assessingthequalityandcommunicativeaspectsofpatientdecisionaidsforearlystagebreastcancertreatmentasystematicreview
AT vaneenbergenmies assessingthequalityandcommunicativeaspectsofpatientdecisionaidsforearlystagebreastcancertreatmentasystematicreview
AT maresengelbertsingeborg assessingthequalityandcommunicativeaspectsofpatientdecisionaidsforearlystagebreastcancertreatmentasystematicreview
AT velikovagalina assessingthequalityandcommunicativeaspectsofpatientdecisionaidsforearlystagebreastcancertreatmentasystematicreview
AT vandepollfranselonneke assessingthequalityandcommunicativeaspectsofpatientdecisionaidsforearlystagebreastcancertreatmentasystematicreview
AT krahmeremiel assessingthequalityandcommunicativeaspectsofpatientdecisionaidsforearlystagebreastcancertreatmentasystematicreview