ABSTRACT
To enhance shared decision-making for patients with breast cancer, we developed an evidence-based educational breast cancer video (BCV) providing an overview of breast cancer biology, prognostic indicators, and surgical treatment options while introducing health care choice. By providing patients access to a BCV with information necessary to make informed surgical decisions before seeing a surgeon, we aimed to increase patient participation in the decision-making process, while decreasing distress. Patients with a new diagnosis of breast cancer were provided a link to the BCV. Group 1 participated in online pre- and postvideo questionnaires, with the BCV embedded in between. The questionnaires evaluated self-reported baseline knowledge of breast cancer and perceived distress related to the diagnosis. Changes in self-reported responses were analyzed using the Wilcoxon matched pairs test. Group 2 received a survey collecting demographics, decision-making information, and perceptions of the BCV at the time of clinic visit before meeting the surgeon. Group 1 included 69 subjects with 62 per cent reporting improved knowledge and 30 per cent reporting reduced distress in regard to their breast cancer diagnosis. Group 2 included 87 subjects; 94 to 98 per cent felt the BCV provided information and stimulated thoughts and questions to assist in breast cancer treatment decision-making. The BCV was positively received by participants and feasible to implement into clinical practice. Evidence-based media tools improve knowledge and reduce distress in patients with a new diagnosis of breast cancer as well as contributing to the shared decision-making process.
Subject(s)
Breast Neoplasms , Decision Making , Patient Education as Topic , Breast Neoplasms/therapy , Female , Humans , Office Visits , Patient Education as Topic/methods , Prospective Studies , Video RecordingABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: We examined providers' perceptions of the Decision Support for Safer Surgery (DS3) tool, which provided preoperative patient-level risk estimates of postoperative adverse events. METHODS: The DS3 tool was evaluated at 2 academic medical centers. During the validation study, surgeons provided usefulness ratings of the DS3 tool for each patient before surgery. At the end of the study, providers' perceptions of the DS3 tool were assessed via questionnaire. Data were analyzed using descriptive statistics and independent samples t tests. RESULTS: During the trial, 23 surgeons completed usefulness ratings of the DS3 tool for 1,006 patients. Surgeons rated the tool as "very useful" or "moderately useful" in 251 (25%) of the cases, "neutral" in 469 (46.6%) of the cases, and "moderately unuseful" or "not useful" in 286 (28.4%) cases. At the end of the trial, 32 providers completed the questionnaire; perceptions were relatively neutral, although several aspects were rated quite favorably. CONCLUSION: The DS3 tool may be most useful for achieving particular tasks (eg, training novice surgeons, increasing patient engagement) or encouraging specific processes (eg, team-based care) in surgical care settings.
