Systematic review of barriers, facilitators, and tools to promote shared decision making in the emergency department.

OBJECTIVE: The objective was to systematically review all studies focusing on barriers, facilitators, and tools currently available for shared decision making (SDM) in emergency departments (EDs). BACKGROUND: Implementing SDM in EDs seems particularly challenging, considering the fast-paced environment and sometimes life-threatening situations. Over 10 years ago, a previous review revealed only a few patient decision aids (PtDAs) available for EDs. METHODS: Literature searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and Cochrane library, up to November 2023. Observational and interventional studies were included to address barriers or facilitators for SDM or to investigate effects of PtDAs on the level of SDM for patients visiting an ED. RESULTS: We screened 1946 studies for eligibility, of which 33 were included. PtDAs studied in EDs address chest pain, syncope, analgesics usage, lumbar puncture, ureterolithiasis, vascular access, concussion/brain bleeding, head-CT choice, coaching for elderly people, and activation of patients with appendicitis. Only the primary outcome was meta-analyzed, showing that PtDAs significantly increased the level of SDM (18.8 on the 100-point OPTION scale; 95% CI 12.5-25.0). PtDAs also tended to increase patient knowledge, decrease decisional conflict and decrease health care services usage, with no obvious effect on overall patient satisfaction. Barriers and facilitators were identified on three levels: (1) patient level-emotions, health literacy, and their own proactivity; (2) clinician level-fear of medicolegal consequences, lack of SDM skills or knowledge, and their ideas about treatment superiority; and (3) system level-time constraints, institutional guidelines, and availability of PtDAs. CONCLUSIONS: Circumstances in EDs are generally less favorable for SDM. However, PtDAs for conditions seen in EDs are helpful in overcoming barriers to SDM and are welcomed by patients. Even in EDs, SDM is feasible and supported by an increasing number of tools for patients and physicians.

Exploring the MAPPING application to facilitate risk communication and shared decision-making between physicians and patients with gynaecological cancer.

This is an observational study in which we evaluated current levels of risk communication (RC) among gynaecological oncologists and their view on the Mapping All Patient Probabilities in Numerical Graphs (MAPPING) application as a possible tool to facilitate RC and shared decision-making (SDM). In part A, we audio-recorded 29 conversations between gynaecological oncologists and patients when discussing treatment options. In part B, interviews were performed with eight gynaecological oncologists.RC and SDM were measured using two observer-based measures, that is, the RC content (RCC) tool (scale 0-2) and the OPTION-5 instrument (scale 0-100). We used CollaboRATE questionnaire (scale 0-10) and a self-developed survey to assess patient-reported RC and SDM. In part B, we evaluated physicians' attitudes regarding the use of the MAPPING application to support RC. Patients were minimally involved in the decision-making process (OPTION-5 25.9%±13.4 RCC 0.21±0.18). Patient-reported SDM was high (mean collaboRATE score 9.19±1.79) and patients preferred receiving numeric information, whereas most physicians used qualitative risk terms rather than exact numbers. In part B, gynaecologists had a positive attitude towards the MAPPING application. However, they stated that the app was difficult to use improvement of layout and better implementations are needed.

Shared decision-making between paediatric haematologists, children with sickle cell disease and their parents: an exploratory study.

Children with sickle cell disease (SCD) face various healthcare choices to be made during the disease process that may impact their lives. Shared decision-making (SDM) could improve their health outcomes. We assessed if, and to what extent, paediatricians engage children with SCD and/or their parents in the decision-making process. In this observational cross-sectional study, paediatric SCD patients and their parents visiting the outpatient paediatrics clinic of a university hospital participated in a SDM baseline measurement. Two evaluators independently and objectively analysed the level of patient involvement in decision-making from the audio-recordings of the consultations using the OPTION-5 instrument, a 0-20-point scale from which scores are usually expressed as a percentage of ideal SDM. The level of SDM, as perceived by patients, parents and paediatricians, was appreciated using the SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc questionnaires, respectively. Scores could range from 0% (no SDM) to 100% (exemplary SDM). Twenty-four consultations in which a decision needed to be made about SCD treatment were audiotaped and analysed; six were from each paediatrician. The group consisted of 17 male and 7 female patients from various cultural backgrounds between 2 and 17 years old, with a mean age of 9.4 years (SD 4.2). Median OPTION-5 scores were 25.0% [IQR] 20.0-40.0%; range 0-55%). Median SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-Doc scores were 56.7% (IQR 39.4-88.9%) and 68.9% (IQR 57.8-77.8%), respectively. CONCLUSION: Although subjective scores of SDM were fair, the objectively scored level of SDM among children suffering from SCD leaves room for improvement. This may be realized by increasing knowledge about the benefits of SDM, child-centred SDM interventions and SDM-training for paediatricians that takes into account the complexity of intercultural challenges and risk communication between stakeholders. WHAT IS KNOWN: • Children that suffer from sickle cell disease (SCD) are more vulnerable to factors that negatively impact the care that they receive as well as suboptimal health outcomes. • Shared decision-making (SDM) can help children participate in a collaborative decision-making process about their preferred treatment options and improve their health outcomes. WHAT IS NEW: • The level of participation in the decision-making process for patients suffering from SCD and the families that they belong to leaves room for improvement. The impact of intercultural challenges and the quality and consistency of risk-communication between stakeholders in paediatric SDM needs further exploration. • Paediatricians are more confident about their ability to involve the child and parents compared to how children and their parents experience their level of involvement in a shared decision-making process.

Stakeholders' Views on Information Needed in a Patient Decision Aid for Microtia Reconstruction.

OBJECTIVE: To assess which information about microtia and the possible reconstructive options health care providers (HCPs), patients and parents believe should be included in a patient decision aid (PtDA). DESIGN: A mixed-methods study comprised of an online survey of HCPs and focus group discussions with patients and parents. PARTICIPANTS: Survey respondents were members of the International Society for Auricular Reconstruction (ISAR). Focus group participants were patients with microtia and their parents, recruited through the microtia outpatient clinic at Amsterdam UMC, and through a Dutch patient organization for cleft and craniofacial conditions. METHODS: An online, investigator-made survey was sent to ISAR members in December 2021. Semi-structured focus group discussions were held in February 2022. Quantitative results were summarized, and qualitative results were thematically grouped. RESULTS: Thirty-two HCPs responded to the survey (response rate 41%). Most respondents (n = 24) were plastic surgeons, who had a median of 15 years of experience (IQR: 7-23 years). Two focus groups were held with a total of five patients and two parents. HCPs, patients and parents generally agreed on the information needed in a PtDA, emphasizing the importance of realistic expectation management. Patients and parents also considered psychosocial and functional outcomes, patient experiences, as well as patients' involvement in decision-making important. CONCLUSIONS: A PtDA for microtia reconstruction should target all patients with microtia, and include information on at least technique-related information, expected esthetic results, possible adverse effects, psychosocial and functional outcomes and patient experiences. Preference eliciting questions should be developed for both pediatric patients and their parents.

Current level of shared decision-making in hepatobiliary surgical oncology (SAPACHA).

BACKGROUND: Shared decision-making (SDM) may improve patient autonomy and health outcomes. This study assessed the level of SDM at both ends of the spectrum of hepatobiliary surgery to identify needs and opportunities for improvement. METHODS: A mixed-methods study was performed. Consultations regarding surgery for perihilar cholangiocarcinoma (pCCA) or hepatocellular adenoma (HCA) were prospectively included between September 2020 and December 2022. The level of patient involvement in treatment decision-making was assessed objectively by analysis of audio-recorded consultations using the OPTION-5 instrument. The perceived level of SDM was appreciated by patients (SDM-Q-9) and surgeons (SDM-Q-doc) through questionnaires. Higher scores indicated higher levels of SDM. Outcomes were compared between patient groups and two focus groups were held. RESULTS: Ten pCCA- and nine HCA-patients were included in the quantitative part of the study. Median OPTION-5, SDM-Q-9 and SDM-Q-doc scores were 35% (IQR: 25-45%), 86% (IQR: 76-96%), and 73% (IQR: 71-78%), respectively. SDM-Q-9 scores among HCA-patients (79% [IQR: 71-82%]) were significantly lower than in pCCA-patients (96% [IQR: 93-100%], p < 0.001). In focus groups, patients reported a lack of information, support, and expressed positive attitudes towards decision support tools (DSTs). CONCLUSION: Patient involvement and information provision among HPB-surgical patients show room for improvement, particularly for HCA-patients. DSTs may be helpful for this purpose.

Healthcare professionals' views on shared decision-making in plastic surgery in the Netherlands.

BACKGROUND: In shared decision-making (SDM), patients and healthcare professionals (HCPs) reach a joint clinical decision based on the best available evidence and the patient's preferences. SDM seems particularly valuable in plastic surgery, as often multiple treatment options are available. This cross-sectional online survey study aimed to assess HCPs' views and knowledge about SDM, identify facilitators and barriers of SDM, and determine specific requirements for SDM within plastic surgery. METHODS: Participants were HCPs working in plastic surgery in the Netherlands. Participant characteristics, SDM knowledge, perceived facilitators and barriers, and requirements were assessed using a custom-made online survey. Two researchers thematically analyzed qualitative data. RESULTS: We received 124 responses (with a response rate of 23%). Most respondents were attending plastic surgeons (79%), and 60% had more than 10 years of experience. Almost all respondents considered SDM important (91%), and most (78%) indicated that they applied SDM during consultations. However, only 15% of the HCPs showed a comprehensive understanding of the principle of SDM. Sufficient time, available sources of information (on treatment options and SDM), and decision support tools were identified as important requirements for SDM. CONCLUSIONS: Despite the positive attitudes toward SDM, there is a clear need for SDM training of HCPs, uniform sources of information and guidelines, and improved awareness and availability of decision support tools. National plastic surgery societies can play a crucial role in improving SDM-related knowledge, the availability of information and decision support tools, and the implementation of SDM in the field of plastic surgery.

Patient-Reported Outcomes of Medical Tattooing for Capillary Malformations.

BACKGROUND: Patients with capillary malformations (CMs) may undergo medical tattooing (MT) as an alternative to laser therapy. But little is known about treatment results and impact from the patients' perspective. OBJECTIVES: In this cross-sectional digital survey study, we evaluated the patient-reported outcomes of MT for CMs. METHODS: MT practices were identified via the Dutch Association of Skin Therapists and Google. These practices invited all their CM patients who had undergone MT between January 2011 and September 2021 to participate. Baseline and treatment characteristics, tattooing effectiveness, patient satisfaction with treatment outcomes, and complications were evaluated using a custom-made online survey. Quality of life was assessed with the Dermatology Life Quality Index (DLQI) questionnaire. Factors associated with treatment effectiveness and patient satisfaction were identified via bivariate analysis and ordinal logistic regression analysis. RESULTS: Most of the 89 respondents were female (69%). Almost all CMs were located on the face (90%) and mainly (dark) red (74%). Nearly all patients had undergone laser therapy (91%). Median number of tattooing sessions was 5 (IQR: 4.0-8.0). Thirty-seven percent of the patients perceived >75% color reduction. Younger patients were more likely to obtain lower treatment effectiveness (OR 0.44, 95% CI: 0.20-0.97). Most patients (83%) were satisfied with treatment results. Patients with lighter (OR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.13-0.72), non-facial (OR 0.15, 95% CI: 0.03-0.89), and hypertrophic CMs (OR 0.30, 95% CI: 0.11-0.82) were less likely to be satisfied with treatment outcomes. Patients with lighter skin types were more satisfied (OR 2.89, 95% CI: 1.23-6.80). Complications included transient pain (23%), bleeding (3.4%), hypertrophic scarring (1.1%), hypopigmentation (1.1%), and a halo around the tattoo (1.1%). CONCLUSION: MT seems a valid alternative treatment in addition to laser therapy for CMs, with mild complications. Most patients are (very) satisfied with treatment results, while color reduction is incomplete. Hence, it seems appropriate to decide together with patients whether or not to use MT as primary treatment or secondary to laser therapy.

Evidence-Based Medicine Course in Combination With Journal Clubs to Promote Evidence-Based Surgery.

Introduction To provide high-quality surgical care, surgeons must critically appraise medical literature to adapt their clinical practice whenever convincing evidence emerges. This will promote evidence-based surgery (EBS). Over the last decade, we have organized monthly journal clubs (JCs) and more extensive quarterly EBS courses for surgical residents and PhD students, supervised by surgical staff. We evaluated the participation, satisfaction, and knowledge gained by this EBS program, to make the program future-proof and aid other educators. Materials and methods An anonymous digital survey was distributed via email among residents, PhD students, and surgeons of the Amsterdam University Medical Centers' (UMC) surgical department in April 2022. The survey included general questions on EBS education, specific course-oriented questions for the residents and PhD students, and questions about supervision for surgeons. Results The survey was completed by 47 respondents from the surgery department of the Amsterdam UMC University Hospital, of whom 63.8% (n=30) were residents or PhD students and 36.2% (n=17) were surgeons. During one year of the combined EBS course and JCs, the EBS course was attended by 40.0% (n=12) of PhD students and was rated with a mean score of 7.6/10. JCs were attended by 86.6% (n=26) of residents or PhD students and received a mean score of 7.4/10. Reported strengths of the JCs were their easy accessibility and the acquisition of critical appraisal skills and scientific knowledge. A reported point of improvement was to focus more deeply on specific epidemiological topics per meeting. Of the surgeons, 64.7% (n=11) had supervised at least one JC and gave a mean score of 8.5/10. The main reasons to supervise JCs were the distribution of knowledge (45.5%), scientific discussion (36.3%), and contact with PhD students (18.1%). Conclusion Our EBS educational program, including JCs and EBS courses, was well appreciated by residents, PhD students, and staff. This format is advocated for other centers aiming to better implement EBS in surgical practice.

DIONYSIUS trial: "Does increasing oxygen nurture your symptomatic ischaemic ulcer sufficiently?" Study protocol for an international multicentre randomised trial.

INTRODUCTION: Diabetic foot ulcers (DFUs) are a major complication of diabetes and often associated with peripheral arterial occlusive disease. Current available evidence shows hyperbaric oxygen therapy (HBOT) can reduce the risk of major amputation, but clinicians remain sceptical about the (cost-)effectiveness and feasibility of HBOT for ischaemic DFUs in clinical practice. Therefore, vascular surgeons and HBOT physicians worldwide feel a strong need for a sufficiently powered clinical trial to determine whether and how many HBOT sessions may be a (cost-)effective adjunctive treatment to ischaemic DFUs. METHODS: An international, multicentre, multi-arm multi-stage design is chosen to conduct an efficient randomised clinical trial. Patients will be randomised to receive standard care (wound treatment and surgical interventions following international guidelines) with either 0, 20, 30 or at least 40 sessions of HBOT. These sessions will comprise 90-120 min of HBOT at a pressure of 2.2-2.5 atmospheres absolute according to international standards. Based on a planned interim analysis, the best performing study arm(s) will continue. Primary end point is major amputation (ie, above ankle) rate after 12 months. Secondary end points are amputation-free survival, wound healing, health-related quality of life and cost-effectiveness. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: All patients enrolled in this trial will receive maximum vascular, endovascular or conservative treatment and local wound care according to best practice and (inter)national guidelines. HBOT therapy is added to the standard treatment and is regarded as a low-risk to moderate-risk therapy. The study is approved by the medical ethics committee of the Amsterdam University Medical Centers, location University of Amsterdam. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2020-000449-15, NL9152, NCT05804097.

What helps the successful implementation of digital decision aids supporting shared decision-making in cardiovascular diseases? A systematic review.

Aims: Although digital decision aids (DAs) have been developed to improve shared decision-making (SDM), also in the cardiovascular realm, its implementation seems challenging. This study aims to systematically review the predictors of successful implementation of digital DAs for cardiovascular diseases. Methods and results: Searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, PsycInfo, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Library from inception to November 2021. Two reviewers independently assessed study eligibility and risk of bias. Data were extracted by using a predefined list of variables. Five good-quality studies were included, involving data of 215 patients and 235 clinicians. Studies focused on DAs for coronary artery disease, atrial fibrillation, and end-stage heart failure patients. Clinicians reported DA content, its effectivity, and a lack of knowledge on SDM and DA use as implementation barriers. Patients reported preference for another format, the way clinicians used the DA and anxiety for the upcoming intervention as barriers. In addition, barriers were related to the timing and Information and Communication Technology (ICT) integration of the DA, the limited duration of a consultation, a lack of communication among the team members, and maintaining the hospital's number of treatments. Clinicians' positive attitude towards preference elicitation and implementation of DAs in existing structures were reported as facilitators. Conclusion: To improve digital DA use in cardiovascular diseases, the optimum timing of the DA, training healthcare professionals in SDM and DA usage, and integrating DAs into existing ICT structures need special effort. Current evidence, albeit limited, already offers advice on how to improve DA implementation in cardiovascular medicine.