OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate the effectiveness of a breast cancer prevention decision aid for women aged 50 and older at higher risk of breast cancer. DESIGN: Pre-test-post-test study using decision aid alone and in combination with counselling. SETTING: Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-seven women aged 50-69 with 1.66% or higher 5-year risk of breast cancer. INTERVENTION: Self-administered breast cancer prevention decision aid. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Acceptability; decisional conflict; knowledge; realistic expectations; choice predisposition; intention to improve life-style practices; psychological distress; and satisfaction with preparation for consultation. RESULTS: The decision aid alone, or in combination with counselling, decreased some dimensions of decisional conflict, increased knowledge (P < 0.01), and created more realistic expectations (P < 0.01). The aid in combination with counselling, significantly reduced decisional conflict (P < 0.01) and psychological distress (P < 0.02), helped the uncertain become certain (P < 0.02), and increased intentions to adopt healthier life-style practices (P < 0.03). Women rated the aid as acceptable, and both women and practitioners were satisfied with the effect it had on the counselling session. CONCLUSION: The decision aid shows promise as a useful decision support tool. Further research should compare the effect of the decision aid in combination with counselling to counselling alone.
OBJECTIVE: To develop and evaluate the effectiveness of a breast cancer prevention decision aid for women aged 50 and older at higher risk of breast cancer. DESIGN: Pre-test-post-test study using decision aid alone and in combination with counselling. SETTING:Breast Cancer Risk Assessment Clinic. PARTICIPANTS: Twenty-seven women aged 50-69 with 1.66% or higher 5-year risk of breast cancer. INTERVENTION: Self-administered breast cancer prevention decision aid. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Acceptability; decisional conflict; knowledge; realistic expectations; choice predisposition; intention to improve life-style practices; psychological distress; and satisfaction with preparation for consultation. RESULTS: The decision aid alone, or in combination with counselling, decreased some dimensions of decisional conflict, increased knowledge (P < 0.01), and created more realistic expectations (P < 0.01). The aid in combination with counselling, significantly reduced decisional conflict (P < 0.01) and psychological distress (P < 0.02), helped the uncertain become certain (P < 0.02), and increased intentions to adopt healthier life-style practices (P < 0.03). Women rated the aid as acceptable, and both women and practitioners were satisfied with the effect it had on the counselling session. CONCLUSION: The decision aid shows promise as a useful decision support tool. Further research should compare the effect of the decision aid in combination with counselling to counselling alone.
Authors: A Trentham-Dietz; P A Newcomb; B E Storer; M P Longnecker; J Baron; E R Greenberg; W C Willett Journal: Am J Epidemiol Date: 1997-06-01 Impact factor: 4.897
Authors: M D Holmes; D J Hunter; G A Colditz; M J Stampfer; S E Hankinson; F E Speizer; B Rosner; W C Willett Journal: JAMA Date: 1999-03-10 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: U Veronesi; P Maisonneuve; A Costa; V Sacchini; C Maltoni; C Robertson; N Rotmensz; P Boyle Journal: Lancet Date: 1998-07-11 Impact factor: 79.321
Authors: Laura L Reimers; Parijatham S Sivasubramanian; Dawn Hershman; Mary Beth Terry; Heather Greenlee; Julie Campbell; Kevin Kalinsky; Matthew Maurer; Ramona Jayasena; Rossy Sandoval; Maria Alvarez; Katherine D Crew Journal: Breast J Date: 2015-04-16 Impact factor: 2.431
Authors: Angel H Y Au; Wendy W T Lam; Miranda C M Chan; Amy Y M Or; Ava Kwong; Dacita Suen; Annie L Wong; Ilona Juraskova; Teresa W T Wong; Richard Fielding Journal: Health Expect Date: 2011-01-11 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Angela Fagerlin; Amanda J Dillard; Dylan M Smith; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Rosemarie Pitsch; Jennifer B McClure; Sarah Greene; Sharon Hensley Alford; Vijayan Nair; Daniel F Hayes; Cheryl Wiese; Peter A Ubel Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2011-03-26 Impact factor: 4.872
Authors: Sharon L Manne; Barbara L Smith; Sara Frederick; Anna Mitarotondo; Deborah A Kashy; Laurie J Kirstein Journal: Transl Behav Med Date: 2020-05-20 Impact factor: 3.046
Authors: Angela Fagerlin; Brian J Zikmund-Fisher; Vijayan Nair; Holly A Derry; Jennifer B McClure; Sarah Greene; Azadeh Stark; Sharon Hensley Alford; Paula Lantz; Daniel F Hayes; Cheryl Wiese; Sarah Claud Zweig; Rosemarie Pitsch; Aleksandra Jankovic; Peter A Ubel Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2010-02 Impact factor: 4.872