Dawn Stacey1, Monica Taljaard, Rodney H Breau, Nicole Baba, Terry Blackmore, Laura Boland, Meg Carley, Robert Chi Wu, Jennifer Smylie, France Légaré. 1. Author Affiliations: School of Nursing, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (Dr Stacey); Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, Clinical Epidemiology Program, The Ottawa Hospital, Ontario, Canada (Drs Stacey, Taljaard, and Breau and Ms Carley); Department of Surgery, Division of Urology, The Ottawa Hospital Research Institute, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (Dr Breau); St. Paul's Hospital, Saskatoon, Saskatchewan, Canada (Ms Baba); Quality and Continuous Improvement, Acute and Emergency Services Branch, Saskatchewan Ministry of Health, Regina, Canada (Ms Blackmore); Population Health, Faculty of Health Sciences, University of Ottawa, Ontario, Canada (Ms Boland); Department of Surgery, Division of Colon and Rectal Surgery, University of Minnesota, Minneapolis (Dr Wu); Ages Cancer Assessment Clinic, The Ottawa Hospital, Ottawa, Canada (Ms Smylie); and Research Center CHU de Québec-Université Laval, Hospital Saint-François D'Assise, Canada (Dr Légaré).
Abstract
BACKGROUND: There are multiple options for men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) help empower individuals and reduce unwarranted practice variation, but few are used in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: We compared 2 programs implementing PtDAs for men with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: This was a comparative case study. Case 1 was a hospital prostate pathway and case 2 was a provincial prostate pathway with 2 locations (2a, 2b). Nurses provided the men with PtDAs and answered questions. Data sources were as follows: (a) 2 years administrative data for men with localized prostate cancer, (b) clinicians survey and interviews, and (c) patients/spouses interviews. Analysis was within and across cases. RESULTS: The PtDA was used with 23% of men in case 1 (95% confidence interval, 19.8%-26.1%) and 98% of men in case 2a (95% confidence interval, 96.5%-99.8%). The pathway was not implemented in case 2b. Men given the PtDA had positive experiences. Many clinicians supported the use of PtDAs, some adapted their discussions with patients, and others did not support the use of PtDAs. To increase use in case 1, participants identified needing a Canadian PtDA available electronically and endorsed by all clinicians. In case 2b, the provincial prostate pathway needed to be implemented. CONCLUSIONS: There was variable uptake of the PtDAs between the cases. Men who received the PtDA had positive outcomes. Several strategies were identified to increase or sustain PtDA use. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Nurses have a key role in supporting men making decisions about prostate cancer treatment by providing PtDAs, answering questions, and advocating for men's preferences.
BACKGROUND: There are multiple options for men diagnosed with localized prostate cancer. Patient decision aids (PtDAs) help empower individuals and reduce unwarranted practice variation, but few are used in clinical practice. OBJECTIVE: We compared 2 programs implementing PtDAs for men with localized prostate cancer. METHODS: This was a comparative case study. Case 1 was a hospital prostate pathway and case 2 was a provincial prostate pathway with 2 locations (2a, 2b). Nurses provided the men with PtDAs and answered questions. Data sources were as follows: (a) 2 years administrative data for men with localized prostate cancer, (b) clinicians survey and interviews, and (c) patients/spouses interviews. Analysis was within and across cases. RESULTS: The PtDA was used with 23% of men in case 1 (95% confidence interval, 19.8%-26.1%) and 98% of men in case 2a (95% confidence interval, 96.5%-99.8%). The pathway was not implemented in case 2b. Men given the PtDA had positive experiences. Many clinicians supported the use of PtDAs, some adapted their discussions with patients, and others did not support the use of PtDAs. To increase use in case 1, participants identified needing a Canadian PtDA available electronically and endorsed by all clinicians. In case 2b, the provincial prostate pathway needed to be implemented. CONCLUSIONS: There was variable uptake of the PtDAs between the cases. Men who received the PtDA had positive outcomes. Several strategies were identified to increase or sustain PtDA use. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: Nurses have a key role in supporting men making decisions about prostate cancer treatment by providing PtDAs, answering questions, and advocating for men's preferences.
Authors: Giulia I Lane; Ajith Dupati; Ji Qi; Stephanie Ferrante; Rodney L Dunn; Roshan Paudel; Daniela Wittmann; Lauren Wallner; Donna L Berry; Chad Ellimoottil; James Montie; J Quentin Clemens Journal: Urol Pract Date: 2022-01-01
Authors: Gloria Ayivi-Vinz; Felly Bakwa Kanyinga; Lysa Bergeron; Simon Décary; Évèhouénou Lionel Adisso; Hervé Tchala Vignon Zomahoun; Sam J Daniel; Martin Tremblay; Karine V Plourde; Sabrina Guay-Bélanger; France Légaré Journal: JMIR Med Educ Date: 2022-05-02
Authors: D B Raphael Daniela; N S Russell; E van Werkhoven; J M Immink; D P G Westhoff; M C Stenfert Kroese; M R Stam; L M van Maurik; C M J van Gestel; T van der Weijden; L J Boersma Journal: Breast Cancer Res Treat Date: 2020-10-24 Impact factor: 4.872