C Groeben1, A Ihrig2, T Hölscher3, T Krones4, E Kessler5, S Kliesch6, C Wülfing7, R Koch8, M P Wirth1, J Huber9. 1. Klinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus an der Technischen Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland. 2. Sektion Psychoonkologie, Klinik für Allgemeine Innere Medizin und Psychosomatik, Universitätsklinikum Heidelberg, Heidelberg, Deutschland. 3. Klinik und Poliklinik für Strahlentherapie und Radioonkologie, Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus, TU Dresden, Dresden, Deutschland. 4. Klinische Ethik, Universitätsspital Zürich, Zürich, Schweiz. 5. Firma ASD Concepts GmbH & Co. KG, Reinheim, Deutschland. 6. Centrum für Reproduktionsmedizin und Andrologie, Abteilung für Klinische Andrologie, Universitätsklinikum Münster, Münster, Deutschland. 7. Abteilung für Urologie, Asklepios Klinik Altona, Hamburg, Deutschland. 8. Institut für Medizinische Informatik und Biometrie, Medizinische Fakultät, TU-Dresden, Dresden, Deutschland. 9. Klinik und Poliklinik für Urologie, Medizinische Fakultät Carl Gustav Carus, Universitätsklinikum Carl Gustav Carus an der Technischen Universität Dresden, Fetscherstraße 74, 01307, Dresden, Deutschland. johannes.huber@uniklinikum-dresden.de.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The decision aid "Entscheidungshilfe Prostatakrebs" is available online free of charge since June 2016. It is designed to support patients with their treatment decision-making and to lighten the burden on their treating urologists. This study evaluates usage data from the first 3 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ICHOM standard set was applied to allow a personalised presentation and to collect relevant data for subsequent counselling. Additionally, personal preferences and psychological burden were assessed amongst others. We collected anonymous data. A multivariate model evaluated predictors for high user satisfaction. RESULTS: From June through August 2016 a total of 319 patients used the decision aid, showing a continuous monthly increase in the number of users. There were n = 219 (68.7%) complete questionnaires. Median age was 66.1 ± 8.0 years. The oncological risk was low in 30.3%, intermediate in 43.6% and high in 26.1%. A majority of 57.5% used the decision aid together with their partner, 35.1% alone and 5.5% with their children. In all, 54.8% were "very satisfied" and 32.0% were "satisfied" with the decision aid for a total satisfaction rate of about 87%. The only predictors of total satisfaction were the usage mode and reported distress level. CONCLUSIONS: As shown by the continuously increasing number of users this decision aid is becoming well established in German urology. Patients' overall ratings are very positive. The majority of patients use the decision aid with their partner. This represents a significant advantage of a multimedia approach compared to print media.
BACKGROUND: The decision aid "Entscheidungshilfe Prostatakrebs" is available online free of charge since June 2016. It is designed to support patients with their treatment decision-making and to lighten the burden on their treating urologists. This study evaluates usage data from the first 3 months. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The ICHOM standard set was applied to allow a personalised presentation and to collect relevant data for subsequent counselling. Additionally, personal preferences and psychological burden were assessed amongst others. We collected anonymous data. A multivariate model evaluated predictors for high user satisfaction. RESULTS: From June through August 2016 a total of 319 patients used the decision aid, showing a continuous monthly increase in the number of users. There were n = 219 (68.7%) complete questionnaires. Median age was 66.1 ± 8.0 years. The oncological risk was low in 30.3%, intermediate in 43.6% and high in 26.1%. A majority of 57.5% used the decision aid together with their partner, 35.1% alone and 5.5% with their children. In all, 54.8% were "very satisfied" and 32.0% were "satisfied" with the decision aid for a total satisfaction rate of about 87%. The only predictors of total satisfaction were the usage mode and reported distress level. CONCLUSIONS: As shown by the continuously increasing number of users this decision aid is becoming well established in German urology. Patients' overall ratings are very positive. The majority of patients use the decision aid with their partner. This represents a significant advantage of a multimedia approach compared to print media.
Entities:
Keywords:
Decision aid; Health services research; Internet; Prostate cancer; Urology
Authors: Andreas Ihrig; Monika Keller; Mechthild Hartmann; Jürgen Debus; Jesco Pfitzenmaier; Boris Hadaschik; Markus Hohenfellner; Wolfgang Herzog; Johannes Huber Journal: BJU Int Date: 2011-03-16 Impact factor: 5.588
Authors: Grace A Lin; David S Aaronson; Sara J Knight; Peter R Carroll; R Adams Dudley Journal: CA Cancer J Clin Date: 2009-10-19 Impact factor: 508.702
Authors: R Schaffert; U Dahinden; T Hess; A Bänziger; P Kuntschik; F Odoni; P Spörri; R T Strebel; J Kamradt; G Tenti; A Mattei; M Müntener; S Subotic; H-P Schmid; P Rüesch Journal: Urologe A Date: 2018-02 Impact factor: 0.639
Authors: Andreas Ihrig; I Maatouk; H C Friederich; M Baunacke; C Groeben; R Koch; C Thomas; J Huber Journal: J Cancer Educ Date: 2020-09-17 Impact factor: 1.771