Catherine H Saunders1, Glyn Elwyn2, Kathryn Kirkland2,3,4, Marie-Anne Durand2. 1. The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH, 03766, USA. Catherine.H.Saunders.GR@dartmouth.edu. 2. The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, 1 Medical Center Drive, Lebanon, NH, 03766, USA. 3. Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, NH, USA. 4. Geisel School of Medicine, Hanover, NH, USA.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Seriously ill people at high risk of death face difficult decisions, especially concerning the extent of medical intervention. Given the inherent difficulty and complexity of these decisions, the care they receive often does not align with their preferences. Patient decision aids that educate individuals about options and help them construct preferences about life-sustaining care may reduce the mismatch between the care people say they want and the care they receive. The quantity and quality of patient decision aids for those at high risk of death, however, are unknown. OBJECTIVE: This protocol describes an approach for conducting an environmental scan of life-sustaining treatment patient decision aids for seriously ill patients, identified online and through informant analysis. We intend for the outcome to be an inventory of all life-sustaining treatment patient decision aids for seriously ill patients currently available (either publicly or proprietarily) along with information about their content, quality, and known use. METHODS: We will identify patient decision aids in a three-step approach (1) mining previously published systematic reviews; (2) systematically searching online and in two popular app stores; and (3) undertaking a key informant survey. We will screen and assess the quality of each patient decision aid identified using the latest published draft of the U.S. National Quality Forum National Standards for the Certification of Patient Decision Aids. Additionally, we will evaluate readability via readable.io and content via inductive content analysis. We will also use natural language processing to assess the content of the decision aids. DISCUSSION: Researchers increasingly recognize the environmental scan as an optimal method for studying real-world interventions, such as patient decision aids. This study will advance our understanding of the availability, quality, and use of decision aids for life-sustaining interventions targeted at seriously ill patients. We also aim to provide patients, their families, and friends, along with their clinicians, a broad set of resources for making life-sustaining treatment decisions. Although we intend to capture all patient decision aids for the seriously ill in our review, we anticipate the possibility that we may miss some decision aids. In addition to publishing our findings in an academic journal, we plan to post our inventory online in an easy-to-read format for public and clinical consumption.
BACKGROUND: Seriously ill people at high risk of death face difficult decisions, especially concerning the extent of medical intervention. Given the inherent difficulty and complexity of these decisions, the care they receive often does not align with their preferences. Patient decision aids that educate individuals about options and help them construct preferences about life-sustaining care may reduce the mismatch between the care people say they want and the care they receive. The quantity and quality of patient decision aids for those at high risk of death, however, are unknown. OBJECTIVE: This protocol describes an approach for conducting an environmental scan of life-sustaining treatment patient decision aids for seriously ill patients, identified online and through informant analysis. We intend for the outcome to be an inventory of all life-sustaining treatment patient decision aids for seriously ill patients currently available (either publicly or proprietarily) along with information about their content, quality, and known use. METHODS: We will identify patient decision aids in a three-step approach (1) mining previously published systematic reviews; (2) systematically searching online and in two popular app stores; and (3) undertaking a key informant survey. We will screen and assess the quality of each patient decision aid identified using the latest published draft of the U.S. National Quality Forum National Standards for the Certification of Patient Decision Aids. Additionally, we will evaluate readability via readable.io and content via inductive content analysis. We will also use natural language processing to assess the content of the decision aids. DISCUSSION: Researchers increasingly recognize the environmental scan as an optimal method for studying real-world interventions, such as patient decision aids. This study will advance our understanding of the availability, quality, and use of decision aids for life-sustaining interventions targeted at seriously ill patients. We also aim to provide patients, their families, and friends, along with their clinicians, a broad set of resources for making life-sustaining treatment decisions. Although we intend to capture all patient decision aids for the seriously ill in our review, we anticipate the possibility that we may miss some decision aids. In addition to publishing our findings in an academic journal, we plan to post our inventory online in an easy-to-read format for public and clinical consumption.
Authors: Dawn Stacey; France Légaré; Krystina Lewis; Michael J Barry; Carol L Bennett; Karen B Eden; Margaret Holmes-Rovner; Hilary Llewellyn-Thomas; Anne Lyddiatt; Richard Thomson; Lyndal Trevena Journal: Cochrane Database Syst Rev Date: 2017-04-12
Authors: Areej El-Jawahri; Michael K Paasche-Orlow; Dan Matlock; Lynne Warner Stevenson; Eldrin F Lewis; Garrick Stewart; Marc Semigran; Yuchiao Chang; Kimberly Parks; Elizabeth S Walker-Corkery; Jennifer S Temel; Hacho Bohossian; Henry Ooi; Eileen Mann; Angelo E Volandes Journal: Circulation Date: 2016-07-05 Impact factor: 29.690
Authors: Mi-Kyung Song; Sandra E Ward; Jason P Fine; Laura C Hanson; Feng-Chang Lin; Gerald A Hladik; Jill B Hamilton; Jessica C Bridgman Journal: Am J Kidney Dis Date: 2015-06-30 Impact factor: 8.860
Authors: Angelo E Volandes; Laurie Anne Ferguson; Aretha D Davis; Nathan C Hull; Michael J Green; Yuchiao Chang; Kristy Deep; Michael K Paasche-Orlow Journal: J Palliat Med Date: 2011-01-21 Impact factor: 2.947
Authors: Rebecca A Aslakson; Anne L R Schuster; Judith Miller; Matthew Weiss; Angelo E Volandes; John F P Bridges Journal: Patient Date: 2014 Impact factor: 3.883
Authors: Linda Brom; Janine C De Snoo-Trimp; Bregje D Onwuteaka-Philipsen; Guy A M Widdershoven; Anne M Stiggelbout; H Roeline W Pasman Journal: Health Expect Date: 2015-12-16 Impact factor: 3.377