Leonora Chiavari1,2, Sara Gandini3, Irene Feroce4, Aliana Guerrieri-Gonzaga5, William Russell-Edu6, Bernardo Bonanni7, Fedro Alessandro Peccatori8. 1. Fertility and Procreation in Oncology Unit, European Institute of Oncology, via Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy. leonora.chiavari@gmail.com. 2. Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistic, European Institute of Oncology, via Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy. leonora.chiavari@gmail.com. 3. Division of Cancer Prevention and Genetics, European Institute of Oncology, via Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy. sara.gandini@ieo.it. 4. Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistic, European Institute of Oncology, via Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy. irene.feroce@ieo.it. 5. Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistic, European Institute of Oncology, via Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy. aliana.guerrierigonzaga@ieo.it. 6. Library, European Institute of Oncology, via Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy. william.russell-edu@ieo.it. 7. Division of Epidemiology and Biostatistic, European Institute of Oncology, via Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy. bernardo.bonanni@ieo.it. 8. Fertility and Procreation in Oncology Unit, European Institute of Oncology, via Ripamonti, 435, 20141, Milan, Italy. fedro.peccatori@ieo.it.
Abstract
PURPOSE: The aim of patient decisional support interventions is to promote shared decision making. Many of these interventions are comprehensive of information and guidance. In this pilot study, we evaluate the effects of a decision-making support (decision counseling (DeCo)) on decision making, decisional conflict, and anxiety in cancer patients facing with values-based decisions on fertility and procreation or genetic testing and risk reduction options in oncology. METHODS: DeCo was proposed during the medical consultation. The following questionnaires were administered to 54 patients before the DeCo session and 1 week after it: stage of decision making (SDM), decisional conflict scale (DCS) and subscales ("uncertainty," "informed," "clarity," "support," and "effective decision"), state-trait anxiety inventory. Decision Support Questionnaire and Usefulness of Decision Counseling were created ad hoc for this study. Multivariate logistic models and ANCOVA models were used to investigate the changes of SDM and DCS in association with DeCo. RESULTS: We found a significant improving in SDM with DeCo (P = 0.01) and a significant reduction in DCS with DeCo (P = 0.007) measured with the Decision Support Questionnaire. In particular, the DCS informed subscale showed a significant decrease in time (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: DeCo is useful to facilitate decision making and reduce decisional conflict. It plays a role in the perception of being informed while not directly providing clinical information. This model of decisional support intervention, in which information is provided only by the clinician and decisional support is focused on personal aspects that influence the decision, could improve shared decision making between patient and clinicians.
PURPOSE: The aim of patient decisional support interventions is to promote shared decision making. Many of these interventions are comprehensive of information and guidance. In this pilot study, we evaluate the effects of a decision-making support (decision counseling (DeCo)) on decision making, decisional conflict, and anxiety in cancerpatients facing with values-based decisions on fertility and procreation or genetic testing and risk reduction options in oncology. METHODS: DeCo was proposed during the medical consultation. The following questionnaires were administered to 54 patients before the DeCo session and 1 week after it: stage of decision making (SDM), decisional conflict scale (DCS) and subscales ("uncertainty," "informed," "clarity," "support," and "effective decision"), state-trait anxiety inventory. Decision Support Questionnaire and Usefulness of Decision Counseling were created ad hoc for this study. Multivariate logistic models and ANCOVA models were used to investigate the changes of SDM and DCS in association with DeCo. RESULTS: We found a significant improving in SDM with DeCo (P = 0.01) and a significant reduction in DCS with DeCo (P = 0.007) measured with the Decision Support Questionnaire. In particular, the DCS informed subscale showed a significant decrease in time (P = 0.002). CONCLUSION: DeCo is useful to facilitate decision making and reduce decisional conflict. It plays a role in the perception of being informed while not directly providing clinical information. This model of decisional support intervention, in which information is provided only by the clinician and decisional support is focused on personal aspects that influence the decision, could improve shared decision making between patient and clinicians.
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: Dawn Stacey; Carol L Bennett; Michael J Barry; Nananda F Col; Karen B Eden; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Anne Lyddiatt; France Légaré; Richard Thomson Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2011-10-05
Authors: Angela Fagerlin; Michael Pignone; Purva Abhyankar; Nananda Col; Deb Feldman-Stewart; Teresa Gavaruzzi; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Carrie A Levin; Arwen H Pieterse; Valerie Reyna; Anne Stiggelbout; Laura D Scherer; Celia Wills; Holly O Witteman Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2013-11-29 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: Dawn Stacey; Jennifer Kryworuchko; Jeff Belkora; B Joyce Davison; Marie-Anne Durand; Karen B Eden; Aubri S Hoffman; Mirjam Koerner; France Légaré; Marie-Chantal Loiselle; Richard L Street Journal: BMC Med Inform Decis Mak Date: 2013-11-29 Impact factor: 2.796
Authors: R Anguzu; R Cusatis; N Fergestrom; A Cooper; K D Schoyer; J B Davis; J Sandlow; K E Flynn Journal: Hum Reprod Date: 2020-03-27 Impact factor: 6.918