Literature DB >> 33676583

Implementation of prostate cancer treatment decision aid in Michigan: a qualitative study.

Roshan Paudel1, Stephanie Ferrante2, Jessica Woodford3, Conrad Maitland4, Eric Stockall5, Thomas Maatman6, Giulia I Lane7, Donna L Berry8, Anne E Sales9, James E Montie2.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND: The American Urological Association White Paper on Implementation of Shared Decision Making (SDM) into Urological Practice suggested SDM represents the state of the art in counseling for patients who are faced with difficult or uncertain medical decisions. The Michigan Urological Surgery Improvement Collaborative (MUSIC) implemented a decision aid, Personal Patient Profile-Prostate (P3P), in 2018 to help newly diagnosed prostate cancer patients make shared decisions with their clinicians. We conducted a qualitative study to assess statewide implementation of P3P throughout MUSIC.
METHODS: We recruited urologists and staff from 17 MUSIC practices (8 implementation and 9 comparator practices) to understand how practices engaged patients on treatment discussions and to assess facilitators and barriers to implementing P3P. Interview guides were developed based on the Tailored Interventions for Chronic Disease (TICD) Framework. Interviews were transcribed for analysis and coded independently by two investigators in NVivo, PRO 12. Additionally, quantitative program data were integrated into thematic analyses.
RESULTS: We interviewed 15 urologists and 11 staff from 16 practices. Thematic analysis of interview transcripts indicated three key themes including the following: (i) P3P is compatible as a SDM tool as over 80% of implementation urologists asked patients to complete the P3P questionnaire routinely and used P3P reports during treatment discussions; (ii) patient receptivity was demonstrated by 370 (50%) of newly diagnosed patients (n = 737) from 8 practices enrolled in P3P with 78% completion rate, which accounts for 39% of all newly diagnosed patients in these practices; and (iii) urologists' attitudes towards SDM varied. Over a third of urologists stated they did not rely on a decision aid. Comparator practices indicated habit, inertia, or concerns about clinic flow as reasons for not adopting P3P and some were unconvinced a decision aid is needed in their practice.
CONCLUSION: Urologists and staff affiliated with MUSIC implementation sites indicated that P3P focuses the treatment discussion on items that are important to patients. Experiences of implementation practices indicate that once initiated, there were no negative effects on clinic flow and urologists indicated P3P saves time during patient counseling, as patients were better prepared for focused discussions. Lack of awareness, personal habits, and inertia are reasons for not implementing P3P among the comparator practices.

Entities:  

Keywords:  Decision aid; Prostate cancer treatment; Shared decision-making

Year:  2021        PMID: 33676583     DOI: 10.1186/s43058-021-00125-w

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Implement Sci Commun        ISSN: 2662-2211


  13 in total

1.  Implementing shared decision making in the NHS.

Authors:  Glyn Elwyn; Steve Laitner; Angela Coulter; Emma Walker; Paul Watson; Richard Thomson
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2010-10-14

2.  Physician variation in management of low-risk prostate cancer: a population-based cohort study.

Authors:  Karen E Hoffman; Jiangong Niu; Yu Shen; Jing Jiang; John W Davis; Jeri Kim; Deborah A Kuban; George H Perkins; Jay B Shah; Grace L Smith; Robert J Volk; Thomas A Buchholz; Sharon H Giordano; Benjamin D Smith
Journal:  JAMA Intern Med       Date:  2014-09       Impact factor: 21.873

3.  Shared decision is the only outcome that matters when it comes to evaluating evidence-based practice.

Authors:  James McCormack; Glyn Elwyn
Journal:  BMJ Evid Based Med       Date:  2018-07-12

4.  Association of Actual and Preferred Decision Roles With Patient-Reported Quality of Care: Shared Decision Making in Cancer Care.

Authors:  Kenneth L Kehl; Mary Beth Landrum; Neeraj K Arora; Patricia A Ganz; Michelle van Ryn; Jennifer W Mack; Nancy L Keating
Journal:  JAMA Oncol       Date:  2015-04       Impact factor: 31.777

Review 5.  Using implementation science to improve urologic oncology care.

Authors:  Ted A Skolarus; Anne E Sales
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2016-07-09       Impact factor: 3.498

6.  Factors that predict treatment choice and satisfaction with the decision in men with localized prostate cancer.

Authors:  Donna L Berry; William J Ellis; Kenneth J Russell; John C Blasko; Nigel Bush; Brent Blumenstein; Paul H Lange
Journal:  Clin Genitourin Cancer       Date:  2006-12       Impact factor: 2.872

Review 7.  Preferred and actual participation roles during health care decision making in persons with cancer: a systematic review.

Authors:  J D Tariman; D L Berry; B Cochrane; A Doorenbos; K Schepp
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  2009-11-25       Impact factor: 32.976

Review 8.  Decision aids for patients facing a surgical treatment decision: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Authors:  Anouk M Knops; Dink A Legemate; Astrid Goossens; Patrick M M Bossuyt; Dirk T Ubbink
Journal:  Ann Surg       Date:  2013-05       Impact factor: 12.969

9.  Treatment decision-making by men with localized prostate cancer: the influence of personal factors.

Authors:  Donna L Berry; William J Ellis; Nancy Fugate Woods; Christina Schwien; Kristin H Mullen; Claire Yang
Journal:  Urol Oncol       Date:  2003 Mar-Apr       Impact factor: 3.498

Review 10.  Clinically Localized Prostate Cancer: AUA/ASTRO/SUO Guideline. Part I: Risk Stratification, Shared Decision Making, and Care Options.

Authors:  Martin G Sanda; Jeffrey A Cadeddu; Erin Kirkby; Ronald C Chen; Tony Crispino; Joann Fontanarosa; Stephen J Freedland; Kirsten Greene; Laurence H Klotz; Danil V Makarov; Joel B Nelson; George Rodrigues; Howard M Sandler; Mary Ellen Taplin; Jonathan R Treadwell
Journal:  J Urol       Date:  2017-12-15       Impact factor: 7.450

View more
  3 in total

1.  Factors Associated with Decision Aid Use in Localized Prostate Cancer.

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

2.  Assessing the Impact of Decision Aid Use on Post Prostatectomy Patient Reported Outcomes.

Authors:  Giulia I Lane; Ji Qi; Ajith Dupati; Stephanie Ferrante; Rodney L Dunn; Roshan Paudel; Daniela Wittmann; Lauren P Wallner; Donna L Berry; Chad Ellimoottil; James E Montie; J Quentin Clemens
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2022-02-24       Impact factor: 2.633

3.  Patient Preferences and Treatment Decisions for Prostate Cancer: Results From A Statewide Urological Quality Improvement Collaborative.

Authors:  Roshan Paudel; Stephanie Ferrante; Ji Qi; Rodney L Dunn; Donna L Berry; Alice Semerjian; Christopher M Brede; Arvin K George; Brian R Lane; Kevin B Ginsburg; James E Montie; Giulia I Lane
Journal:  Urology       Date:  2021-04-29       Impact factor: 2.633

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.