Increasing readiness to decide and strengthening behavioral intentions: Evaluating the impact of a web-based patient decision aid for breast cancer treatment options (BresDex: www.bresdex.com)

2012 ◽  
Vol 88 (2) ◽  
pp. 209-217 ◽  
Author(s):  
Stephanie Sivell ◽  
Adrian Edwards ◽  
Antony S.R. Manstead ◽  
Malcolm W.R. Reed ◽  
Lisa Caldon ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Behavioral Intentions ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Breast Cancer Treatment ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Web Based ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
The Impact

scholarly journals The impact of lymphedema on health-related quality of life up to 10 years after breast cancer treatment

2021 ◽  
Vol 7 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Mads G. Jørgensen ◽  
Navid M. Toyserkani ◽  
Frederik G. Hansen ◽  
Anette Bygum ◽  
Jens A. Sørensen
Keyword(s):  
Breast Cancer ◽  
Quality Of Life ◽  
Cancer Treatment ◽  
Breast Cancer Treatment ◽  
Health Related Quality ◽  
Related Quality ◽  
Health Related ◽  
The Impact

AbstractThe impact of breast cancer-related lymphedema (BCRL) on long-term quality of life is unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate the impact of BCRL on health-related quality of life (HRQoL) up to 10 years after breast cancer treatment. This regional population-based study enrolled patients treated for breast cancer with axillary lymph node dissection between January 1st 2007 and December 31th 2017. Follow up and assessments of the included patients were conducted between January 2019 and May 2020. The study outcome was HRQoL, evaluated with the Lymphedema Functioning, Disability and Health Questionnaire, the Disabilities of the Arm, Shoulder and Hand Questionnaire and the Short Form (36) Health Survey Questionnaire. Multivariate linear logistic regression models adjusted for confounders provided mean score differences (MDs) with 95% confidence intervals in each HRQoL scale and item. This study enrolled 244 patients with BCRL and 823 patients without BCRL. Patients with BCRL had significantly poorer HRQoL than patients without BCRL in 16 out of 18 HRQoL subscales, for example, in physical function (MDs 27, 95%CI: 24; 30), mental health (MDs 24, 95%CI: 21; 27) and social role functioning (MDs 20, 95%CI: 17; 23). Age, BMI, BCRL severity, hand and dominant arm affection had only minor impact on HRQoL (MDs < 5), suggesting a high degree of inter-individual variation in coping with lymphedema. This study showed that BCRL is associated with long-term impairments in HRQoL, especially affecting the physical and psychosocial domains. Surprisingly, BCRL diagnosis rather than clinical severity drove the largest impairments in HRQoL.

scholarly journals Patient decision aid based on multi-criteria decision analysis for disease-modifying drugs for multiple sclerosis: prototype development

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
I. E. H. Kremer ◽  
P. J. Jongen ◽  
S. M. A. A. Evers ◽  
E. L. J. Hoogervorst ◽  
W. I. M. Verhagen ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Decision Making ◽  
Shared Decision Making ◽  
Decision Aid ◽  
Healthcare Professionals ◽  
Treatment Options ◽  
Shared Decision ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Disease Modifying Drugs ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
Further Development

Abstract Background Since decision making about treatment with disease-modifying drugs (DMDs) for multiple sclerosis (MS) is preference sensitive, shared decision making between patient and healthcare professional should take place. Patient decision aids could support this shared decision making process by providing information about the disease and the treatment options, to elicit the patient’s preference and to support patients and healthcare professionals in discussing these preferences and matching them with a treatment. Therefore, a prototype of a patient decision aid for MS patients in the Netherlands—based on the principles of multi-criteria decision analysis (MCDA) —was developed, following the recommendations of the International Patient Decision Aid Standards. MCDA was chosen as it might reduce cognitive burden of considering treatment options and matching patient preferences with the treatment options. Results After determining the scope to include DMDs labelled for relapsing-remitting MS and clinically isolated syndrome, users’ informational needs were assessed using focus groups (N = 19 patients) and best-worst scaling surveys with patients (N = 185), neurologists and nurses (N = 60) to determine which information about DMDs should be included in the patient decision aid. Next, an online format and computer-based delivery of the patient decision aid was chosen to enable embedding of MCDA. A literature review was conducting to collect evidence on the effectiveness and burden of use of the DMDs. A prototype was developed next, and alpha testing to evaluate its comprehensibility and usability with in total thirteen patients and four healthcare professionals identified several issues regarding content and framing, methods for weighting importance of criteria in the MCDA structure, and the presentation of the conclusions of the patient decision aid ranking the treatment options according to the patient’s preferences. Adaptations were made accordingly, but verification of the rankings provided, validation of the patient decision aid, evaluation of the feasibility of implementation and assessing its value for supporting shared decision making should be addressed in further development of the patient decision aid. Conclusion This paper aimed to provide more transparency regarding the developmental process of an MCDA-based patient decision aid for treatment decisions for MS and the challenges faced during this process. Issues identified in the prototype were resolved as much as possible, though some issues remain. Further development is needed to overcome these issues before beta pilot testing with patients and healthcare professionals at the point of clinical decision-making can take place to ultimately enable making conclusions about the value of the MCDA-based patient decision aid for MS patients, healthcare professionals and the quality of care.

The impact of structuring information in a patient decision aid

2004 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 457-477 ◽  
Author(s):  
Neil Carrigan ◽  
Peter H. Gardner ◽  
Mark Conner ◽  
John Maule
Keyword(s):  
Decision Aid ◽  
Patient Decision Aid ◽  
Patient Decision ◽  
The Impact
Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document