Valerie Fiset1, Annette M. O'Connor, William Evans, Ian Graham, Catherine Degrasse, Jo Logan. 1. Sisters of Charity of Ottawa Health Service, Ottawa, Canada; Ottawa Hospital-Civic Campus, Ottawa, Canada; University of Ottawa, Ottawa, Canada; Clinical Epidemiology Unit, Loeb Health Research Institute at the Ottawa Hospital-Civic Campus, Ottawa, Canada; Ottawa Regional Cancer Centre, Ottawa, Canada; Ottawa Regional Women's Breast Health Centre, Ottawa Hospital-Civic Campus, Ottawa, Canada.
Abstract
Although guidelines for treating stage IV non-small cell lung cancer suggest that the patient's values should be considered in decision-making, there are no practical tools available to assist them with their decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a decision aid that incorporates patient values. DESIGN AND SAMPLE: (1) Before/after evaluation with patients referred to a regional cancer centre. (2) Mailed survey of thoracic surgeons and respirologists in Ontario. INTERVENTION: An audio-tape guided individuals to review a booklet describing stage IV non-small cell lung cancer, its impact and possible coping strategies, treatment options, benefits and risks, and examples of the decision-making of others. Patients then used a worksheet to consider and communicate personal issues involved in the choice, including: personal values using a 'weigh-scale'; questions; preferred role in decision-making; and predisposition. MEASURES: (1) Patient questionnaires eliciting knowledge, the decision, decisional conflict and acceptability of the decision aid. (2) Physician questionnaires eliciting attitudes toward the decision aid. RESULTS: (1) Twenty of 30 patients used the aid in decision-making. Users thought that the aid was acceptable and significantly improved their knowledge about options and outcomes (P < 0.001), and reduced their decisional conflict (P < 0.001). (2) The majority of the 29 physicians who reviewed the decision aid found it acceptable, were comfortable providing it to patients and said that they were likely to use it. CONCLUSION: The decision aid is a useful and acceptable adjunct to personal counselling.
Although guidelines for treating stage IV non-small cell lung cancer suggest that the patient's values should be considered in decision-making, there are no practical tools available to assist them with their decision-making. OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate a decision aid that incorporates patient values. DESIGN AND SAMPLE: (1) Before/after evaluation with patients referred to a regional cancer centre. (2) Mailed survey of thoracic surgeons and respirologists in Ontario. INTERVENTION: An audio-tape guided individuals to review a booklet describing stage IV non-small cell lung cancer, its impact and possible coping strategies, treatment options, benefits and risks, and examples of the decision-making of others. Patients then used a worksheet to consider and communicate personal issues involved in the choice, including: personal values using a 'weigh-scale'; questions; preferred role in decision-making; and predisposition. MEASURES: (1) Patient questionnaires eliciting knowledge, the decision, decisional conflict and acceptability of the decision aid. (2) Physician questionnaires eliciting attitudes toward the decision aid. RESULTS: (1) Twenty of 30 patients used the aid in decision-making. Users thought that the aid was acceptable and significantly improved their knowledge about options and outcomes (P < 0.001), and reduced their decisional conflict (P < 0.001). (2) The majority of the 29 physicians who reviewed the decision aid found it acceptable, were comfortable providing it to patients and said that they were likely to use it. CONCLUSION: The decision aid is a useful and acceptable adjunct to personal counselling.
Authors: A M O'Connor; P Tugwell; G A Wells; T Elmslie; E Jolly; G Hollingworth; R McPherson; H Bunn; I Graham; E Drake Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 1998-03
Authors: Patricia J Hollen; Richard J Gralla; Randy A Jones; Christopher Y Thomas; David R Brenin; Geoffrey R Weiss; Anneke T Schroen; Gina R Petroni Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2012-10-11 Impact factor: 3.603
Authors: Inge Henselmans; Hanneke W M van Laarhoven; Pomme van Maarschalkerweerd; Hanneke C J M de Haes; Marcel G W Dijkgraaf; Dirkje W Sommeijer; Petronella B Ottevanger; Helle-Brit Fiebrich; Serge Dohmen; Geert-Jan Creemers; Filip Y F L de Vos; Ellen M A Smets Journal: Oncologist Date: 2019-11-26
Authors: Deb Feldman-Stewart; Sarah Brennenstuhl; Kathryn McIssac; Joan Austoker; Agathe Charvet; Paul Hewitson; Karen R Sepucha; Tim Whelan Journal: Health Expect Date: 2007-03 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Thomas J Smith; Lindsay A Dow; Enid A Virago; James Khatcheressian; Robin Matsuyama; Laurel J Lyckholm Journal: J Support Oncol Date: 2011 Mar-Apr
Authors: Kimberly S Chiew; Heather Shepherd; Janette Vardy; Martin H N Tattersall; Phyllis N Butow; Natasha B Leighl Journal: Health Expect Date: 2008-03 Impact factor: 3.377