Cargando…

A dynamic web-based decision aid to improve informed choice in organised breast cancer screening. A pragmatic randomised trial in Italy

BACKGROUND: Improving the quality of information and communication is a priority in organised breast cancer screening and an ethical duty. Programmes must offer the information each woman is looking for, promoting informed decision-making. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a web-based dynamic...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Roberto, Anna, Colombo, Cinzia, Candiani, Giulia, Satolli, Roberto, Giordano, Livia, Jaramillo, Lina, Castagno, Roberta, Mantellini, Paola, Falini, Patrizia, Carnesciali, Eva, Valenza, Mario, Costa, Liliana, Campari, Cinzia, Caroli, Stefania, Faggiano, Roberto Cosimo, Orione, Lorenzo, Belmessieri, Bruna, Marchiò, Vanda, Deandrea, Silvia, Silvestri, Anna, Luciano, Daniela, Paci, Eugenio, Mosconi, Paola
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Nature Publishing Group UK 2020
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC7462858/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/32546834
http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41416-020-0935-2
Descripción
Sumario:BACKGROUND: Improving the quality of information and communication is a priority in organised breast cancer screening and an ethical duty. Programmes must offer the information each woman is looking for, promoting informed decision-making. This study aimed to develop and evaluate a web-based dynamic decision aid (DA). METHODS: A pragmatic randomised trial carried out in six regional organised screening programmes recruited women at the first invitation receiving DA or a web-based standard brochure (SB). The primary outcome was informed choice measured on knowledge, attitudes, and intentions. Follow-up period: 7–10 days. Secondary outcomes included participation rate, satisfaction, decisional conflict, and acceptability of DA. RESULTS: Two thousand one hundred and nineteen women were randomised and 1001 completed the study. Respectively, 43.9% and 36.9% in the DA and SB reached the informed choice. The DA gave a 13-point higher proportion of women aware about overdiagnosis compared to SB (38.3% versus 25.2%, p < 0.0001). The percentage of women attending screening was the same: 84% versus 83%. Decisional conflict was significantly lower in the DA group (14.4%) than in the SB group (19.3%). CONCLUSION: DA increases informed choice. Complete information including the pros, cons, controversies, and overdiagnosis–overtreatment issues boost a woman’s knowledge without reducing the rate of actual screening participation. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov number NCT 03097653.