PURPOSE: Appropriate utilization of treatment is a goal for all patients undergoing cancer treatment. Proper treatment maximizes benefit and limits exposure to unnecessary measures. This report describes findings of the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a short, clinic-based decision aid and presents an in-depth clinical profile of the participants. METHODS: This descriptive study used a prospective, quantitative approach to obtain the feasibility and acceptability of a decision aid (DecisionKEYS for Balancing Choices) for use in clinical settings. It combined results of trials of patients with three different common malignancies. All groups used the same decision aid series. Participants included 80 patients with solid tumors (22 with newly diagnosed breast cancer, 19 with advanced prostate cancer, and 39 with advanced lung cancer) and their 80 supporters as well as their physicians and nurses, for a total of 160 participants and 10 health professionals. RESULTS: The decision aid was highly acceptable to patient and supporter participants in all diagnostic groups. It was feasible for use in clinic settings; the overall value was rated highly. Of six physicians, all found the interactive format with the help of the nurse as feasible and acceptable. Nurses also rated the decision aid favorably. CONCLUSIONS: This intervention provides the opportunity to enhance decision making about cancer treatment and warrants further study including larger and more diverse groups. Strengths of the study included a theoretical grounding, feasibility testing of a practical clinic-based intervention, and summative evaluation of acceptability of the intervention by patient and supporter pairs. Further research also is needed to test the effectiveness of the decision aid in diverse clinical settings and to determine if this intervention can decrease overall costs.
PURPOSE: Appropriate utilization of treatment is a goal for all patients undergoing cancer treatment. Proper treatment maximizes benefit and limits exposure to unnecessary measures. This report describes findings of the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a short, clinic-based decision aid and presents an in-depth clinical profile of the participants. METHODS: This descriptive study used a prospective, quantitative approach to obtain the feasibility and acceptability of a decision aid (DecisionKEYS for Balancing Choices) for use in clinical settings. It combined results of trials of patients with three different common malignancies. All groups used the same decision aid series. Participants included 80 patients with solid tumors (22 with newly diagnosed breast cancer, 19 with advanced prostate cancer, and 39 with advanced lung cancer) and their 80 supporters as well as their physicians and nurses, for a total of 160 participants and 10 health professionals. RESULTS: The decision aid was highly acceptable to patient and supporter participants in all diagnostic groups. It was feasible for use in clinic settings; the overall value was rated highly. Of six physicians, all found the interactive format with the help of the nurse as feasible and acceptable. Nurses also rated the decision aid favorably. CONCLUSIONS: This intervention provides the opportunity to enhance decision making about cancer treatment and warrants further study including larger and more diverse groups. Strengths of the study included a theoretical grounding, feasibility testing of a practical clinic-based intervention, and summative evaluation of acceptability of the intervention by patient and supporter pairs. Further research also is needed to test the effectiveness of the decision aid in diverse clinical settings and to determine if this intervention can decrease overall costs.
Authors: Valerie Fiset; Annette M. O'Connor; William Evans; Ian Graham; Catherine Degrasse; Jo Logan Journal: Health Expect Date: 2000-06 Impact factor: 3.377
Authors: Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Wendy L Nelson; Michael Pignone; Glyn Elwyn; David R Rovner; Annette M O'Connor; Angela Coulter; Rosaly Correa-de-Araujo Journal: Med Decis Making Date: 2007-09-14 Impact factor: 2.583
Authors: J C Weeks; E F Cook; S J O'Day; L M Peterson; N Wenger; D Reding; F E Harrell; P Kussin; N V Dawson; A F Connors; J Lynn; R S Phillips Journal: JAMA Date: 1998-06-03 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: Mary Ann O'Brien; Timothy J Whelan; Miguel Villasis-Keever; Amiram Gafni; Cathy Charles; Robin Roberts; Susan Schiff; Wenjie Cai Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2009-01-05 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: N B Leighl; F A Shepherd; D Zawisza; R L Burkes; R Feld; J Waldron; A Sun; D Payne; A Bezjak; M H N Tattersall Journal: Br J Cancer Date: 2008-05-27 Impact factor: 7.640
Authors: Kelly M Dumais; Nadeeka Dias; Laura Khurana; Sarah Tressel Gary; Brooke Witherspoon; Christopher J Evans; Susan M Dallabrida Journal: Patient Date: 2019-12 Impact factor: 3.883
Authors: Georgina L Jones; Rachael H Moss; Frances Darby; Neda Mahmoodi; Bob Phillips; Jane Hughes; Katharina S Vogt; Diana M Greenfield; Grete Brauten-Smith; Jacqui Gath; Tonia Campbell; Daniel Stark; Galina Velikova; John A Snowden; Ellissa Baskind; Mariano Mascerenhas; Daniel Yeomanson; Jonathan Skull; Sheila Lane; Hilary L Bekker; Richard A Anderson Journal: Front Oncol Date: 2022-06-30 Impact factor: 5.738
Authors: Lourdes R Carhuapoma; Winter M Thayer; Catherine E Elmore; Jane Gildersleeve; Tanmay Singh; Farah Shaukat; Melissa K Uveges; Tamryn Gray; Crystal Chu; Daniel Song; Patricia J Hollen; Jennifer Wenzel; Randy A Jones Journal: Trials Date: 2021-09-16 Impact factor: 2.728
Authors: Patricia J Hollen; Richard J Gralla; Ryan D Gentzler; Richard D Hall; Bethany Coyne; Haiying Cheng; Balazs Halmos; Jane Gildersleeve; Claudia Calderon; Ivora Hinton; Geoffrey Weiss; Jeffrey Crawford; Jane Cerise; Martin Lesser Journal: Oncologist Date: 2020-11-10
Authors: Maureen Thodé; H Roeline W Pasman; Liesbeth M van Vliet; Olga C Damman; Johannes C F Ket; Anneke L Francke; Irene P Jongerden Journal: BMJ Support Palliat Care Date: 2020-10-05 Impact factor: 4.633
Authors: W Savelberg; T van der Weijden; L Boersma; M Smidt; C Willekens; A Moser Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2017-08-01 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Karen Kane McDonnell; David G Gallerani; Brandi R Newsome; Otis L Owens; Jenay Beer; Amanda R Myren-Bennett; Elizabeth Regan; James W Hardin; Lisa A Webb Journal: Integr Cancer Ther Date: 2020 Jan-Dec Impact factor: 3.279