Wendy W T Lam1, Miranda Chan, Amy Or, Ava Kwong, Dacita Suen, Richard Fielding. 1. Centre for Psycho-Oncological Research and Training, Department of Community Medicine and Unit for Behavioural Sciences, School of Public Health, The University of Hong Kong, 5/F, WMW Mong Block, Faculty of Medicine Building, 21 Sassoon Rd, Pokfulam, Hong Kong; Special Administrative Region, People's Republic of China. wwtlam@hku.hk
Abstract
PURPOSE: Breast cancer (BC) decision aid (DA) randomized studies are limited to DA use in consultations among Western populations and for primary surgery. Their effectiveness beyond consultations, for reconstructive surgery and in other populations, has not been evaluated. We developed a DA administered after consultation for Chinese women deciding on BC surgery and, where relevant, immediate breast reconstruction, which was evaluated in this randomized controlled trial (RCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Overall, 276 women considering BC surgery for early-stage BC were randomly assigned to receive a DA (take-home booklet) or the standard information booklet (control condition) after the initial consultation, wherein surgeons disclosed the diagnosis and discussed treatment options with patients. Using block random assignment by week, 138 women were assigned to the DA arm and 138 to the control arm. Participants completed interview-based questionnaires 1 week after consultation and then 1, 4, and 10 months after surgery. Primary outcome measures were decisional conflict, decision-making difficulties, BC knowledge 1 week after consultation, and decision regret 1 month after surgery. Secondary outcome measures were treatment decision, decision regret 4 and 10 months after surgery, and postsurgical anxiety and depression. RESULTS: The DA group reported significantly lower decisional conflict scores 1 week after consultation (P = .016) compared with women in the control arm. Women receiving the DA had significantly lower decision regret scores 4 (P = .026) and 10 months (P = .014) after surgery and lower depression scores 10 months after surgery (P = .001). CONCLUSION: This RCT demonstrated DAs may benefit Chinese patients in Hong Kong by reducing decisional conflict and subsequent regret and enhance clinical services for this population.
RCT Entities:
PURPOSE:Breast cancer (BC) decision aid (DA) randomized studies are limited to DA use in consultations among Western populations and for primary surgery. Their effectiveness beyond consultations, for reconstructive surgery and in other populations, has not been evaluated. We developed a DA administered after consultation for Chinese women deciding on BC surgery and, where relevant, immediate breast reconstruction, which was evaluated in this randomized controlled trial (RCT). PATIENTS AND METHODS: Overall, 276 women considering BC surgery for early-stage BC were randomly assigned to receive a DA (take-home booklet) or the standard information booklet (control condition) after the initial consultation, wherein surgeons disclosed the diagnosis and discussed treatment options with patients. Using block random assignment by week, 138 women were assigned to the DA arm and 138 to the control arm. Participants completed interview-based questionnaires 1 week after consultation and then 1, 4, and 10 months after surgery. Primary outcome measures were decisional conflict, decision-making difficulties, BC knowledge 1 week after consultation, and decision regret 1 month after surgery. Secondary outcome measures were treatment decision, decision regret 4 and 10 months after surgery, and postsurgical anxiety and depression. RESULTS: The DA group reported significantly lower decisional conflict scores 1 week after consultation (P = .016) compared with women in the control arm. Women receiving the DA had significantly lower decision regret scores 4 (P = .026) and 10 months (P = .014) after surgery and lower depression scores 10 months after surgery (P = .001). CONCLUSION: This RCT demonstrated DAs may benefit Chinese patients in Hong Kong by reducing decisional conflict and subsequent regret and enhance clinical services for this population.
Authors: Shoshana M Rosenberg; Mary L Greaney; Andrea F Patenaude; Ann H Partridge Journal: J Adolesc Young Adult Oncol Date: 2019-04-03 Impact factor: 2.223
Authors: Sarah T Hawley; Yun Li; Lawrence C An; Kenneth Resnicow; Nancy K Janz; Michael S Sabel; Kevin C Ward; Angela Fagerlin; Monica Morrow; Reshma Jagsi; Timothy P Hofer; Steven J Katz Journal: J Clin Oncol Date: 2018-01-24 Impact factor: 44.544
Authors: Kristina Demas Woodhouse; Katie Tremont; Anil Vachani; Marilyn M Schapira; Neha Vapiwala; Charles B Simone; Abigail T Berman Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2017-06 Impact factor: 2.037
Authors: Natalie Causarano; Jennica Platt; Nancy N Baxter; Shaghayegh Bagher; Jennifer M Jones; Kelly A Metcalfe; Stefan O P Hofer; Anne C O'Neill; Terry Cheng; Elizabeth Starenkyj; Toni Zhong Journal: Support Care Cancer Date: 2014-10-29 Impact factor: 3.603
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