OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of Guide to Decide (GtD), a web-based, personally-tailored decision aid designed to inform women's decisions about prophylactic tamoxifen and raloxifene use. METHODS:Postmenopausal women, age 46-74, with BCRAT 5-year risk ≥ 1.66% and no prior history of breast cancer were randomized to one of three study arms:intervention (n=690), Time 1 control (n=160), or 3-month control (n=162). Intervention participants viewed GtD prior to completing a post-test and 3 month follow-up assessment. Controls did not. We assessed the impact of GtD on women's decisional conflict levels and treatment decision behavior at post-test and at 3 months, respectively. RESULTS: Intervention participants had significantly lower decisional conflict levels at post-test (p<0.001) and significantly higher odds of making a decision about whether or not to take prophylactic tamoxifen or raloxifene at 3-month follow-up (p<0.001) compared to control participants. CONCLUSION: GtD lowered decisional conflict and helped women at high risk of breast cancer decide whether to take prophylactic tamoxifen or raloxifene to reduce their cancer risk. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Web-based, tailored decision aids should be used more routinely to facilitate informed medical decisions, reduce patients' decisional conflict, and empower patients to choose the treatment strategy that best reflects their own values. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To assess the impact of Guide to Decide (GtD), a web-based, personally-tailored decision aid designed to inform women's decisions about prophylactic tamoxifen and raloxifene use. METHODS: Postmenopausal women, age 46-74, with BCRAT 5-year risk ≥ 1.66% and no prior history of breast cancer were randomized to one of three study arms:intervention (n=690), Time 1 control (n=160), or 3-month control (n=162). Intervention participants viewed GtD prior to completing a post-test and 3 month follow-up assessment. Controls did not. We assessed the impact of GtD on women's decisional conflict levels and treatment decision behavior at post-test and at 3 months, respectively. RESULTS: Intervention participants had significantly lower decisional conflict levels at post-test (p<0.001) and significantly higher odds of making a decision about whether or not to take prophylactic tamoxifen or raloxifene at 3-month follow-up (p<0.001) compared to control participants. CONCLUSION: GtD lowered decisional conflict and helped women at high risk of breast cancer decide whether to take prophylactic tamoxifen or raloxifene to reduce their cancer risk. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Web-based, tailored decision aids should be used more routinely to facilitate informed medical decisions, reduce patients' decisional conflict, and empower patients to choose the treatment strategy that best reflects their own values. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
Authors: Victor G Vogel; Joseph P Costantino; D Lawrence Wickerham; Walter M Cronin; Reena S Cecchini; James N Atkins; Therese B Bevers; Louis Fehrenbacher; Eduardo R Pajon; James L Wade; André Robidoux; Richard G Margolese; Joan James; Scott M Lippman; Carolyn D Runowicz; Patricia A Ganz; Steven E Reis; Worta McCaskill-Stevens; Leslie G Ford; V Craig Jordan; Norman Wolmark Journal: JAMA Date: 2006-06-05 Impact factor: 56.272
Authors: J P Costantino; M H Gail; D Pee; S Anderson; C K Redmond; J Benichou; H S Wieand Journal: J Natl Cancer Inst Date: 1999-09-15 Impact factor: 13.506
Authors: Glyn Elwyn; Annette O'Connor; Dawn Stacey; Robert Volk; Adrian Edwards; Angela Coulter; Richard Thomson; Alexandra Barratt; Michael Barry; Steven Bernstein; Phyllis Butow; Aileen Clarke; Vikki Entwistle; Deb Feldman-Stewart; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Nora Moumjid; Al Mulley; Cornelia Ruland; Karen Sepucha; Alan Sykes; Tim Whelan Journal: BMJ Date: 2006-08-14
Authors: Susan M Domchek; Andrea Eisen; Kathleen Calzone; Jill Stopfer; Anne Blackwood; Barbara L Weber Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2003-02-15 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Angela Fagerlin; David Rovner; Sue Stableford; Christophir Jentoft; John T Wei; Margaret Holmes-Rovner Journal: Ann Intern Med Date: 2004-05-04 Impact factor: 25.391
Authors: Stephanie Sivell; Adrian Edwards; Antony S R Manstead; Malcolm W R Reed; Lisa Caldon; Karen Collins; Alison Clements; Glyn Elwyn Journal: Patient Educ Couns Date: 2012-04-26
Authors: Tessa Madden; Jessica Holttum; Ragini Maddipati; Gina M Secura; Robert F Nease; Jeffrey F Peipert; Mary C Politi Journal: Contraception Date: 2020-08-06 Impact factor: 3.375
Authors: Karin Johnson; Leah Tuzzio; Anne Renz; Laura-Mae Baldwin; Michael Parchman Journal: J Am Board Fam Med Date: 2016 Sep-Oct Impact factor: 2.657
Authors: Aubri S Hoffman; Hilary A Llewellyn-Thomas; Anna N A Tosteson; Annette M O'Connor; Robert J Volk; Ivan M Tomek; Steven B Andrews; Stephen J Bartels Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2014-12-12 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Kimberly R Enard; Patricia Dolan Mullen; Geetanjali R Kamath; Nickell M Dixon; Robert J Volk Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2016-06-06 Impact factor: 2.796