Cargando…

Shared Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction for Breast Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review

For most breast cancer (BC) patients who have undergone a mastectomy, the decision whether to proceed with breast reconstruction (BR) is complicated and requires deliberation. Shared decision-making (SDM) helps to address those needs and promote informed value-based decisions. However, little is kno...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Li, Xuejing, Meng, Meiqi, Zhao, Junqiang, Zhang, Xiaoyan, Yang, Dan, Fang, Jiaxin, Wang, Junxin, Han, Liu, Hao, Yufang
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Dove 2021
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8670888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34916786
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S335080
_version_ 1784615050114236416
author Li, Xuejing
Meng, Meiqi
Zhao, Junqiang
Zhang, Xiaoyan
Yang, Dan
Fang, Jiaxin
Wang, Junxin
Han, Liu
Hao, Yufang
author_facet Li, Xuejing
Meng, Meiqi
Zhao, Junqiang
Zhang, Xiaoyan
Yang, Dan
Fang, Jiaxin
Wang, Junxin
Han, Liu
Hao, Yufang
author_sort Li, Xuejing
collection PubMed
description For most breast cancer (BC) patients who have undergone a mastectomy, the decision whether to proceed with breast reconstruction (BR) is complicated and requires deliberation. Shared decision-making (SDM) helps to address those needs and promote informed value-based decisions. However, little is known about the SDM status for BR in BC patients. This scoping review describes: 1) basic characteristics of studies on BR SDM in BC patients; 2) factors influencing BR SDM in BC patients; 3) experience and perception of BR SDM in BC patients; and 4) outcome measures reported. This review was performed in accordance with the Arksey and O’Malley methodology. A total of 5 English and 4 Chinese databases were searched, as well as different sources from grey literature. The data extraction form was developed by referring to the objectives and the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF). Data was analyzed using thematic analysis, framework analysis and descriptive statistics, with findings presented in the tables and diagrams. A total of 1481 records were retrieved and 42 of these included after screening. In 21 (21/42, 50%) of the studies, patient decision aids (PDAs) were utilized, and in 17 (17/42, 40.48%) of the studies, the factors influencing the implementation of SDM were explored. Of these 17 studies, the factors influencing the implementation of SDM were categorized into the following: the patient level (17/17, 100%), the healthcare level (2/17, 11.76%) and the organizational and system level (7/17, 41.18%). A total of 8 (19.05%) of the 42 studies focused on patients’ experiences and perceptions of SDM, and all studies used qualitative research methods. Of these 8 studies, a total of 7 (7/8, 87.50%) focused on patients’ experiences of SDM participation, and 4 (4/8, 50.00%) focused on patients’ perceptions of SDM. A total of 24 studies (24/42, 57.14%) involved quantitative outcome measures, where 49 items were divided into three classifications according to the outcomes of ODSF: the quality of the decision (17/24, 70.83%), the quality of the decision-making process (20/24, 83.33%), and impact (13/24, 54.17%). Although researchers have paid less attention to other research points in the field of SDM, compared to the design and application of SDM interventional tools, the research team still presents some equally noteworthy points through scoping review. For instance, the various factors influencing BC patients’ participation in SDM for BR (especially at the healthcare provider level and at the organizational system level), patients’ experiences and perceptions. Systematic reviews (SRs) should be conducted to quantify the impact of these different factors on BR SDM. Implementation of scientific theories and methods can inform the exploration and integration of these factors.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-8670888
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2021
publisher Dove
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-86708882021-12-15 Shared Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction for Breast Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review Li, Xuejing Meng, Meiqi Zhao, Junqiang Zhang, Xiaoyan Yang, Dan Fang, Jiaxin Wang, Junxin Han, Liu Hao, Yufang Patient Prefer Adherence Review For most breast cancer (BC) patients who have undergone a mastectomy, the decision whether to proceed with breast reconstruction (BR) is complicated and requires deliberation. Shared decision-making (SDM) helps to address those needs and promote informed value-based decisions. However, little is known about the SDM status for BR in BC patients. This scoping review describes: 1) basic characteristics of studies on BR SDM in BC patients; 2) factors influencing BR SDM in BC patients; 3) experience and perception of BR SDM in BC patients; and 4) outcome measures reported. This review was performed in accordance with the Arksey and O’Malley methodology. A total of 5 English and 4 Chinese databases were searched, as well as different sources from grey literature. The data extraction form was developed by referring to the objectives and the Ottawa Decision Support Framework (ODSF). Data was analyzed using thematic analysis, framework analysis and descriptive statistics, with findings presented in the tables and diagrams. A total of 1481 records were retrieved and 42 of these included after screening. In 21 (21/42, 50%) of the studies, patient decision aids (PDAs) were utilized, and in 17 (17/42, 40.48%) of the studies, the factors influencing the implementation of SDM were explored. Of these 17 studies, the factors influencing the implementation of SDM were categorized into the following: the patient level (17/17, 100%), the healthcare level (2/17, 11.76%) and the organizational and system level (7/17, 41.18%). A total of 8 (19.05%) of the 42 studies focused on patients’ experiences and perceptions of SDM, and all studies used qualitative research methods. Of these 8 studies, a total of 7 (7/8, 87.50%) focused on patients’ experiences of SDM participation, and 4 (4/8, 50.00%) focused on patients’ perceptions of SDM. A total of 24 studies (24/42, 57.14%) involved quantitative outcome measures, where 49 items were divided into three classifications according to the outcomes of ODSF: the quality of the decision (17/24, 70.83%), the quality of the decision-making process (20/24, 83.33%), and impact (13/24, 54.17%). Although researchers have paid less attention to other research points in the field of SDM, compared to the design and application of SDM interventional tools, the research team still presents some equally noteworthy points through scoping review. For instance, the various factors influencing BC patients’ participation in SDM for BR (especially at the healthcare provider level and at the organizational system level), patients’ experiences and perceptions. Systematic reviews (SRs) should be conducted to quantify the impact of these different factors on BR SDM. Implementation of scientific theories and methods can inform the exploration and integration of these factors. Dove 2021-12-10 /pmc/articles/PMC8670888/ /pubmed/34916786 http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S335080 Text en © 2021 Li et al. https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/This work is published and licensed by Dove Medical Press Limited. The full terms of this license are available at https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php and incorporate the Creative Commons Attribution – Non Commercial (unported, v3.0) License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc/3.0/) ). By accessing the work you hereby accept the Terms. Non-commercial uses of the work are permitted without any further permission from Dove Medical Press Limited, provided the work is properly attributed. For permission for commercial use of this work, please see paragraphs 4.2 and 5 of our Terms (https://www.dovepress.com/terms.php).
spellingShingle Review
Li, Xuejing
Meng, Meiqi
Zhao, Junqiang
Zhang, Xiaoyan
Yang, Dan
Fang, Jiaxin
Wang, Junxin
Han, Liu
Hao, Yufang
Shared Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction for Breast Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review
title Shared Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction for Breast Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review
title_full Shared Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction for Breast Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review
title_fullStr Shared Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction for Breast Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review
title_full_unstemmed Shared Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction for Breast Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review
title_short Shared Decision-Making in Breast Reconstruction for Breast Cancer Patients: A Scoping Review
title_sort shared decision-making in breast reconstruction for breast cancer patients: a scoping review
topic Review
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC8670888/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/34916786
http://dx.doi.org/10.2147/PPA.S335080
work_keys_str_mv AT lixuejing shareddecisionmakinginbreastreconstructionforbreastcancerpatientsascopingreview
AT mengmeiqi shareddecisionmakinginbreastreconstructionforbreastcancerpatientsascopingreview
AT zhaojunqiang shareddecisionmakinginbreastreconstructionforbreastcancerpatientsascopingreview
AT zhangxiaoyan shareddecisionmakinginbreastreconstructionforbreastcancerpatientsascopingreview
AT yangdan shareddecisionmakinginbreastreconstructionforbreastcancerpatientsascopingreview
AT fangjiaxin shareddecisionmakinginbreastreconstructionforbreastcancerpatientsascopingreview
AT wangjunxin shareddecisionmakinginbreastreconstructionforbreastcancerpatientsascopingreview
AT hanliu shareddecisionmakinginbreastreconstructionforbreastcancerpatientsascopingreview
AT haoyufang shareddecisionmakinginbreastreconstructionforbreastcancerpatientsascopingreview