Effectiveness of decision aids on critically ill patients' outcomes and family members' knowledge, anxiety, depression and decisional conflict: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Decision aids (DAs) have been proposed to support patients and families with disease information processing and decision-making, but their effectiveness for critically ill patients and their families is incompletely understood. AIM: To systematically synthesize evidence on the effectiveness of the DAs on the prognosis of critically ill patients and knowledge, anxiety, depression and decisional conflict of their family members. STUDY DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis. We conducted a systematic search of literature using PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, Web of Science, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature database, Scopus, PsycNet, CNKI and Wanfang Database from the inception of the databases until May 2023 to identify randomized clinical trials (RCTs) describing DAs interventions targeted at adult intensive care unit (ICU) patients or their families. We also searched grey literature in four databases: Chinese Clinical Trials Registry, Chinese Cochrane Center, Open Grey and GreyNet International. RESULTS: Seven RCTs were included in the review. Meta-analysis identified longer hospital length of stay (LOS) among all patients compared with usual care (mean difference [MD] = 5.64 days, 95% confidence interval, CI [0.29, 10.98], p = .04), but not in surviving patients (MD = 2.09 days, 95% CI [-3.70, 7.89], p = .48). However, there was no evidence of an effect of DAs on hospital mortality (RR = 1.25, 95% CI [0.92, 1.70], p = .15), ICU LOS (MD = 3.77 days, 95% CI [-0.17, 7.70], p = .06) and length of mechanical ventilation (MD = 0.88 days, 95% CI [-2.22, 3.97], p = .58). DAs led to a statistically significant improvement in family members' knowledge (standard mean difference = 0.84, 95% CI [0.12, 1.56], p = .02). We found no significant effect of DAs on anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder, decisional conflict and quality of communication of family members. CONCLUSIONS: This review provides effective evidence that DAs can potentially improve the knowledge level of family members while prolonging the hospital LOS among critically ill patients. RELEVANCE TO CLINICAL PRACTICE: Well-designed large-scale studies with DAs tailored to the individuals' preferences and existing cultural values are warranted.

Design, implementation and usability analysis of patient empowerment in ADLIFE project via patient reported outcome measures and shared decision making.

INTRODUCTION: This paper outlines the design, implementation, and usability study results of the patient empowerment process for chronic disease management, using Patient Reported Outcome Measurements and Shared Decision-Making Processes. BACKGROUND: The ADLIFE project aims to develop innovative, digital health solutions to support personalized, integrated care for patients with severe long-term conditions such as Chronic Obstructive Pulmonary Disease, and/or Chronic Heart Failure. Successful long-term management of patients with chronic conditions requires active patient self-management and a proactive involvement of patients in their healthcare and treatment. This calls for a patient-provider partnership within an integrated system of collaborative care, supporting self-management, shared-decision making, collection of patient reported outcome measures, education, and follow-up. METHODS: ADLIFE follows an outcome-based and patient-centered approach where PROMs represent an especially valuable tool to evaluate the outcomes of the care delivered. We have selected 11 standardized PROMs for evaluating the most recent patients' clinical context, enabling the decision-making process, and personalized care planning. The ADLIFE project implements the "SHARE approach' for enabling shared decision-making via two digital platforms for healthcare professionals and patients. We have successfully integrated PROMs and shared decision-making processes into our digital toolbox, based on an international interoperability standard, namely HL7 FHIR. A usability study was conducted with 3 clinical sites with 20 users in total to gather feedback and to subsequently prioritize updates to the ADLIFE toolbox. RESULTS: User satisfaction is measured in the QUIS7 questionnaire on a 9-point scale in the following aspects: overall reaction, screen, terminology and tool feedback, learning, multimedia, training material and system capabilities. With all the average scores above 6 in all categories, most respondents have a positive reaction to the ADLIFE PEP platform and find it easy to use. We have identified shortcomings and have prioritized updates to the platform before clinical pilot studies are initiated. CONCLUSIONS: Having finalized design, implementation, and pre-deployment usability studies, and updated the tool based on further feedback, our patient empowerment mechanisms enabled via PROMs and shared decision-making processes are ready to be piloted in clinal settings. Clinical studies will be conducted based at six healthcare settings across Spain, UK, Germany, Denmark, and Israel.

Decisional needs and interventions for young women considering contraceptive options: an umbrella review.

BACKGROUND: Although women face a wide range of contraceptive options, globally, young women are at risk of unintended pregnancies. Our umbrella review aimed to determine the decisional needs of nulligravida women aged 11 to 30 considering contraceptive options and identify effective interventions to support their involvement in making decisions about contraceptive use. METHODS: We followed Joanna Briggs Institute methods for umbrella reviews, theoretically guided by the Ottawa Decision Support Framework. We searched six electronic databases. Two reviewers independently screened citations, extracted data, and appraised quality using AMSTAR2. We analysed findings descriptively. RESULTS: Of 124 citations, we identified 11 reviews of variable quality (critically low to moderate quality): Six reported decisional needs and 5 reported on interventions. Decisional needs of young women were: (a) information needs about contraceptive options (e.g., mechanism of actions, eligibility, administration, side effects); (b) unclear values (concerns about hormone use) and features of different options (based on their religious values); and (c) need for support and resources (support from society and need for privacy). Compared to controls, decision support interventions including patient decision aids and patient education material increased knowledge and improved discussion of options with their clinicians. CONCLUSION: Young women making contraceptive decisions experience unmet decisional needs. Effective interventions such as patient decision aids and general patient education materials may address their decisional needs and enhance their level of participation in making contraception decisions. Implications and contribution to the field: Young women's decisional needs when considering contraceptive use are informational needs, unclear values (including religious influences), need for support and resources when facing this decision. Interventions, such as patient decision aid and patient education material can, address decisional needs by improving young women's knowledge about contraceptive options.

Decisions With Patients, Not for Patients: Shared Decision-Making in Allergy and Immunology.

Shared decision-making (SDM) is an increasingly implemented patient-centered approach to navigating patient preferences regarding diagnostic and treatment options and supported decision-making. This therapeutic approach prioritizes the patient's perspectives, considering current medical evidence to provide a balanced approach to clinical scenarios. In light of numerous recent guideline recommendations that are conditional in nature and are clinical scenarios defined by preference-sensitive care options, there is a tremendous opportunity for SDM and validated decision aids. Despite the expansion of the literature on SDM, formal acceptance among clinicians remains inconsistent. Surprisingly, a significant disparity exists between clinicians' self-reported adherence to SDM principles and patients' perceptions of its implementation during clinical encounters. This discrepancy underscores a fundamental issue in the delivery of health care, where clinicians may overestimate their integration of SDM, while patients' experiences suggest otherwise. This review critically examines the factors contributing to this inconsistency, including barriers within the health care system, clinician attitudes and behaviors, and patient expectations and preferences. By elucidating these factors in the fields of food allergy, asthma, eosinophilic esophagitis, and other allergic diseases, this review aims to provide insights into bridging the gap between clinician perception and patient experience in SDM. Addressing this discordance is crucial for advancing patient-centered care and ensuring that SDM is not merely a theoretical concept but a tangible reality in the.

Effectiveness of patient decision aids in patients with advanced kidney disease: a meta-analysis based on randomized controlled trials.

PURPOSE: To systematically evaluate the decision effectiveness of patient decision aids (PtDAs) on the decision-making effect of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. METHOD: Two authors independently searched ten electronic databases [Web of science, PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Embase, CINAHL, EBSCO, CBM, CNKI, WanFang DATA and Vip database], to include randomized controlled trials of interventions through PtDAs in patients with advanced chronic kidney disease published from the inception of the database until April 2024. Two authors conducted a comprehensive quality evaluation (Cochrane 5.1.0) before independently extracting and analyzing the data with RevMan 5.2. RESULTS: The study included 11 randomized controlled trials with a total of 1613 patients. According to the results, PtDAs can improve the decision knowledge [SMD = 0.53, 95% CI (0.26, 0.80), P = 0.0002] and decision preparation [SMD = 2.34, 95% CI (2.04, 2.65), P < 0.00001] of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. Additionally, there was a substantial decrease in the levels of decision regret [SMD = - 1.33, 95% CI (- 2.11, - 0.55), P < 0.05] and decision conflict [SMD = - 0.88, 95% CI (- 1.47, - 0.28), P = 0.004]. CONCLUSION: The current available evidence indicates that PtDAs can significantly enhance the decision knowledge and decision preparation of patients with advanced chronic kidney disease. Additionally, PtDAs can reduce the levels of decision regret and decision conflict. TRIAL REGISTRY: CRD42023433798.

A reflection on the use of virtual nominal group technique in health policy and research priority consensus studies.

BACKGROUND: Nominal group technique (NGT) is widely used in healthcare research to facilitate decision-making and consensus-building. Traditional NGT requires face-to-face interaction and its limitations include potential biases, logistical challenges and high costs. The COVID-19 pandemic necessitated a shift to virtual methods, which led to the development of virtual nominal group technique (vNGT). Aim To reflect on the use of vNGT, particularly in the context of Ghader et al (2023 ), to understand its effectiveness in overcoming the limitations of traditional NGT and on its applicability in pandemic-affected scenarios. METHOD: This paper reviews and discusses literature on the use and effectiveness of NGT compared to other consensus-building methods and examines the emergence of vNGT in overcoming the limitations of traditional NGT. The authors also reflect on their use of vNGT in a study to identify cardiovascular research priorities in the UAE and provide details of its implementation. DISCUSSION: vNGT bridges the gap between the localised nature of traditional NGT and the global reach of the Delphi technique. It allows for the inclusion of diverse participants, saves costs and offers time-efficiency. The study demonstrated vNGT's adaptability, with participants engaging in idea generation, discussion and prioritisation using online tools. However, challenges persist with vNGT, including reduced accessibility for certain demographics, timing issues across time zones and technical difficulties. CONCLUSION: vNGT successfully integrates the interactive, consensus-building aspects of NGT with the broad reach of Delphi. It can be valuable in research and decision-making, especially in an era of increased remote collaboration. IMPLICATIONS FOR PRACTICE: vNGT can significantly impact healthcare research and policy formulation by enabling more inclusive, cost-effective and timely consensus-building processes. However, considerations for accessibility and technical support are crucial for its wider adoption and effectiveness.

[Advancing standards for the development of evidence-based health information for consumers: Needs and priorities among members of the Network for Evidence-based Medicine]. / Inhaltliche Weiterentwicklung von Standards zur Erstellung evidenzbasierter Gesundheitsinformationen: Eine Bedarfserhebung und Priorisierung im EbM-Netzwerk.

BACKGROUND: The Good Practice Guidelines for health information, Good Health Information Austria and Guideline Evidence-based Health Information are established resources for developing evidence-based health information in the German-speaking regions. The aim of this project was to capture challenges in applying these standards in practice, identify gaps and development needs and gain insights for their further development. METHODS: In December 2020, members of the working group for patient information and involvement of the Network for Evidence-based Medicine were invited to share their experiences and needs in applying German standards for evidence-based health information through an online survey focussing on open questions (part 1: needs assessment). The feedback was analysed using qualitative content analysis and presented in a workshop at the EbM Congress 2021 with the goal of specifying the feedback from the needs assessment and discussing ideas for the further development of the standards (part 2: specification). In the final step, a second survey was conducted in February 2023 to prioritize the identified topics by the working group members (part 3: prioritization). The results were analysed descriptively. RESULTS: Among the 41 participants, only 23% considered the standards to be sufficient, and only 55% found their application in the development of information to be easy or rather easy. The needs assessment and workshop (n=46) helped to identify various areas of action. With regard to the application of the standards, the following challenges were identified: lack of user orientation, content gaps, methods and risk communication. Gaps in the standards were identified regarding formats, content, and the connection to healthcare provision. For the advancement of the standards ideas for additional content, stakeholder involvement, and improvement of the usability of the standards were identified. In the prioritization survey, the topic areas, "presenting benefits and harms" and "content beyond treatments (in particular, diagnostics and prognosis)" were considered to be the most important (n=36). DISCUSSION: Among members of the working group for patient information and involvement of the German Network for Evidence-based Medicine, a high demand has been identified for the further development of standards for creating evidence-based health information. In addition to content development, the integration of existing documents and tools should also be considered, including products issued by other institutions. The success of advancing the standards also depends on improving their applicability - for example through an attractive online platform. The results are limited by the sample which only included members of the EbM Network's patient information and participation working group and a limited response rate. CONCLUSIONS: The needs assessment showed that the currently established standards and recommendations for the development of evidence-based health information in the German-speaking regions represent important cornerstones but need to be expanded to answer more practice-oriented questions. The challenges and proposed solutions stated by the participants can help further develop the standards. The prioritization can be used to set priorities for the development of the standards, guide the order of possible work packages and allocate resources.

Development of a Decision Aid for Family Surrogate Decision Makers of Critically Ill Patients Requiring Renal Replacement Therapy in ICU: A User-Centered Design for Rapid Prototyping.

Objectives Renal replacement therapy (RRT) is increasingly adopted for critically ill patients diagnosed with acute kidney injury, but the optimal time for initiation remains unclear and prognosis is uncertain, leading to medical complexity, ethical conflicts, and decision dilemmas in intensive care unit (ICU) settings. This study aimed to develop a decision aid (DA) for the family surrogate of critically ill patients to support their engagement in shared decision-making process with clinicians. Methods Development of DA employed a systematic process with user-centered design (UCD) principle, which included: (i) competitive analysis: searched, screened, and assessed the existing DAs to gather insights for design strategies, developmental techniques, and functionalities; (ii) user needs assessment: interviewed family surrogates in our hospital to explore target user group's decision-making experience and identify their unmet needs; (iii) evidence syntheses: integrate latest clinical evidence and pertinent information to inform the content development of DA. Results The competitive analysis included 16 relevant DAs, from which we derived valuable insights using existing resources. User decision needs were explored among a cohort of 15 family surrogates, revealing four thematic issues in decision-making, including stuck into dilemmas, sense of uncertainty, limited capacity, and delayed decision confirmation. A total of 27 articles were included for evidence syntheses. Relevant decision-making knowledge on disease and treatment, as delineated in the literature sourced from decision support system or clinical guidelines, were formatted as the foundational knowledge base. Twenty-one items of evidence were extracted and integrated into the content panels of benefits and risks of RRT, possible outcomes, and reasons to choose. The DA was drafted into a web-based phototype using the elements of UCD. This platform could guide users in their preparation of decision-making through a sequential four-step process: identifying treatment options, weighing the benefits and risks, clarifying personal preferences and values, and formulating a schedule for formal shared decision-making with clinicians. Conclusions We developed a rapid prototype of DA tailored for family surrogate decision makers of critically ill patients in need of RRT in ICU setting. Future studies are needed to evaluate its usability, feasibility, and clinical effects of this intervention.

Do Shared Decision-Making and Patient Decision Aids Take Patient's Preferences Seriously?

Most clinical guidelines for the assessment and management of atrial fibrillation emphasize the importance of decision support provided by Patients Decision Aids, but they are to be used and evaluated only in the context of Shared Decision-Making. Detailed examination of 10 clinical decision support tools reveals that many do not engage with patient's preferences at all. Only two take them seriously in terms of their formation, elicitation and processing, aimed at identifying the optimal personalised decision for the patient. This failure is traced to a reluctance to accept the ontological nature of preferences, as instantiations of comparative magnitudes, and to set them in an analytical framework that facilitates their transparent integration with individualised evidence.

Assessing the Content and Effect of Web-Based Decision Aids for Postmastectomy Breast Reconstruction: Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

BACKGROUND: Web-based decision aids have been shown to have a positive effect when used to improve the quality of decision-making for women facing postmastectomy breast reconstruction (PMBR). However, the existing findings regarding these interventions are still incongruent, and the overall effect is unclear. OBJECTIVE: We aimed to assess the content of web-based decision aids and its impact on decision-related outcomes (ie, decision conflict, decision regret, informed choice, and knowledge), psychological-related outcomes (ie, satisfaction and anxiety), and surgical decision-making in women facing PMBR. METHODS: This systematic review and meta-analysis followed the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses) guidelines. A total of 6 databases, PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, CINAHL, PsycINFO, and Web of Science Core Collection, were searched starting at the time of establishment of the databases to May 2023, and an updated search was conducted on April 1, 2024. MeSH (Medical Subject Headings) terms and text words were used. The Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool for randomized controlled trials was used to assess the risk of bias. The certainty of evidence was assessed using the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation approach. RESULTS: In total, 7 studies included 579 women and were published between 2008 and 2023, and the sample size in each study ranged from 26 to 222. The results showed that web-based decision aids used audio and video to present the pros and cons of PMBR versus no PMBR, implants versus flaps, and immediate versus delayed PMBR and the appearance and feel of the PMBR results and the expected recovery time with photographs of actual patients. Web-based decision aids help improve PMBR knowledge, decisional conflict (mean difference [MD]=-5.43, 95% CI -8.87 to -1.99; P=.002), and satisfaction (standardized MD=0.48, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.95; P=.05) but have no effect on informed choice (MD=-2.80, 95% CI -8.54 to 2.94; P=.34), decision regret (MD=-1.55, 95% CI -6.00 to 2.90 P=.49), or anxiety (standardized MD=0.04, 95% CI -0.50 to 0.58; P=.88). The overall Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation quality of the evidence was low. CONCLUSIONS: The findings suggest that the web-based decision aids provide a modern, low-cost, and high dissemination rate effective method to promote the improved quality of decision-making in women undergoing PMBR. TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO CRD42023450496; https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?RecordID=450496.

On subjective measures of decision quality.

In times of person-centered care, it is all the more important to support patients in making good decisions about their care. One way to offer such support to patients is by way of Patient Decision Aids (PDAs). Ranging from patient brochures to web-based tools, PDAs explicitly state the decisions patients face, inform them about their medical options, help them to clarify and discuss their values, and ultimately make a decision. However, lingering discussions surround effectiveness research on PDAs. In this article, I focus on two subjective measures of decision quality that are widely used as outcome measures in effectiveness research on PDAs (i.e., the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) and measures of regret). Although these measurement instruments have attracted critical attention in the scientific literature, bioethicists have hardly engaged with them. Therefore, I set myself to analyze the relationship between (the different subscales of) the DCS and measures of regret, on the one hand, and ethical principles such as beneficence and autonomy, on the other hand. In light of that analysis, I will clarify some discussions regarding the use of these measures of decision quality in effectiveness research on PDAs. This should help us to align the way we evaluate PDAs with ethical principles and avoid that our attempts to support patients in making good decisions about their care that is so central to person-centered care point in unethical directions.

Preliminary testing of "roadmap to parenthood" decision aid and planning tool for family building after cancer: Results of a single-arm pilot study.

OBJECTIVE: Many young adult female cancer survivors need to use reproductive medicine, surrogacy, or adoption to have a child. This study pilot tested Roadmap to Parenthood, a web-based, self-guided decision aid and planning tool for family building after cancer (disease agnostic). METHODS: A single-arm pilot study tested feasibility, acceptability, and obtained effect size estimates of the Roadmap tool. Participants, recruited via hospital-based and social media strategies, completed a baseline survey (T1), accessed the Roadmap tool (website), then completed surveys at one- and 3-months (T2 and T3, respectively). Feasibility and acceptability were evaluated with rates of eligibility, enrollment, and survey completion, and feedback. Pairwise t-tests and repeated measures ANOVA evaluated usage effects. Effect size estimates were calculated. RESULTS: Participants (N = 98) averaged 31 years old (SD = 5.61); 71% were nulliparous. Enrollment rate was 73%, T1-T2 completion rate was 80%, and 93% accessed the website. From T1-T2, participants reported improvements in decisional conflict (p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 0.85), unmet information needs (p < 0.001; Cohen's d = 0.70), self-efficacy (p = 0.003; Cohen's d = 0.40), and self-efficacy for managing negative emotions (p = 0.03; Cohen's d = 0.29); effects were sustained at T3. There was no change in reproductive distress (p = 0.22). By T3, 94% reported increased consideration of preparatory actions and 20%-61% completed such actions. CONCLUSIONS: The Roadmap intervention was feasible to conduct, acceptable to users, and led to improvements in key psychosocial outcomes. Future directions will test intervention efficacy in a randomized controlled trial with a larger sample and over a longer period. A web-based tool may help women make decisions about family building after cancer and prepare for potential challenges.

Co-creation of a health literate-sensitive training and conversation aid to support shared decision-making in maternity care.

Background: Maternity care increasingly aims to achieve Shared Decision-making (SDM), yet seemingly not to the benefit of clients with low health literacy (HL). We developed an SDM training for healthcare professionals (HCPs) and a conversation aid to support HL-sensitive SDM in maternity care. Methods: The training and conversation aid were based on previous needs assessments and expert consultation, and were developed in co-creation with clients (n = 15) and HCPs (n = 7). Usability, acceptability and comprehension of the conversation aid were tested among new clients (n = 14) and HCPs (n = 6). Acceptability of the training was tested among midwifery students (n = 5). Results: In the co-creation sessions, clients reported to expect that their midwife becomes acquainted with their general values, priorities and daily context. Clients also emphasized wanting to be supported in their preferred decisional role. User test interviews showed that clients and HCPs were positive towards using the conversation aid, but also apprehensive about the time it required. The user test of the training showed that more attention was needed for recognizing and adapting information provision to clients' HL level. Conclusion and innovation: The newly developed conversation aid and training have potential to support HCPs and clients in HL-sensitive SDM.

Exploration of decision aids to support advance care planning: A scoping review.

BACKGROUND: Advance care planning is a process through which people communicate their goals and preferences for future medical care. Due to the complexity of the decision-making process, decision aids can assist individuals in balancing potential benefits and risks of treatment options. OBJECTIVE: While decision aids have the potential to better promote advance care planning, their characteristics, content and application effectiveness are unclear and lack systematic review. Therefore, we aimed to explore these three aspects and establish a foundation for future research. DESIGN: Scoping review. METHODS: This scoping review adheres to the framework proposed by Arksey and O'Malley and the PRISMA-ScR list. Six English-language databases were systematically searched from the time of construction until 1 December 2023. Two researchers conducted the article screening and data extraction, and the extracted data was presented in written tables and narrative summaries. RESULTS: Of the 1479 titles and abstracts, 20 studies fulfilled the inclusion criteria. Types of decision aids were employed, mainly websites and videos. Decision aid's primary components center around 11 areas, such as furnishing information, exploring treatment and care preferences. The main manifestations were a significant increase in knowledge and improved recognition of patients' target value preferences. Among the aids, websites and videos for advance care planning have relatively high content acceptability and decision-making process satisfaction, but their feasibility has yet to be tested. CONCLUSIONS: Decision aids were varied, with content focused on describing key information and exploring treatment and care preferences. Regarding application effects, the aids successfully facilitated the advance care planning process and improved the quality of participants' decisions. Overall, decision aids are efficient in improving the decision-making process for implementing advance care planning in cancer and geriatric populations. In the future, personalised decision aids should be developed based on continuous optimization of tools' quality and promoted for clinical application. REPORTING METHOD: The paper has adhered to the EQUATOR guidelines and referenced the PRISMAg-ScR checklist. NO PATIENT OR PUBLIC CONTRIBUTION: This is a review without patient and public contribution. REGISTRATION: https://doi.org/10.17605/OSF.IO/YPHKF, Open Science DOI: 10.17605/OSF.IO/YPHKF.

Aids to improve understanding of statistical risk in patients consenting for surgery and interventional procedures: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Informed consent is an essential process in clinical decision-making, through which healthcare providers educate patients about benefits, risks, and alternatives of a procedure. Statistical risk information is difficult to communicate and the effectiveness of aids aimed at supporting this type of communication is uncertain. This systematic review aims to study the impact of risk communication adjuncts on patients' understanding of statistical risk in surgery and interventional procedures. METHODS: A systematic search was performed across Medline, Embase, PsycINFO, Scopus, and Web of Science until July 2021 with a repeated search in September 2022. RCTs and observational studies examining risk communication tools (e.g., information leaflets and audio-video) in adult (age >16) patients undergoing a surgical or interventional procedure were included. Primary outcomes included the objective assessment of statistical risk recall. Secondary outcomes included patient attitudes with respect to statistical information. Due to the study heterogeneity, a narrative synthesis was performed. RESULTS: A total of 4348 articles were identified, and following abstract and full-text screening 14 articles, including 9 RCTs, were included. The total number of adult patients was 1513. The most common risk communication tool used was written information (n = 7). Most RCTs (7/9, 77.8%) showed statistically significant improvements in patient understanding of statistical risk in the intervention group. Quality assessment found some concerns with all RCTs. CONCLUSION: Risk communication tools appear to improve recall of statistical risk. Additional prospective trials comparing various aids simultaneously are warranted to determine the most effective method of improving understanding.

Measuring decision aid effectiveness for end-of-life care: A systematic review.

Objective: To systematically review research analyzing the effectiveness of decision aids for end-of-life care, including how researchers specifically measure decision aid success. Methods: We conducted a systematic review synthesizing quantitative, qualitative, and mixed-methods study results using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis guidelines. Four databases were searched through February 18, 2023. Inclusion criteria required articles to evaluate end-of-life care decision aids. The review is registered under PROSPERO (#CRD42023408449). Results: A total of 715 articles were initially identified, with 43 meeting the inclusion criteria. Outcome measures identified included decisional conflict, less aggressive care desired, knowledge improvements, communication improvements, tool satisfaction, patient anxiety and well-being, and less aggressive care action completed. The majority of studies reported positive outcomes especially when the decision aid development included International Patient Decision Aid Standards. Conclusion: Research examining end of life care decision aid use consistently reports positive outcomes. Innovation: This review presents data that can guide the next generation of decision aids for end-of-life care, namely using the International Patient Decision Aid Standards in developing tools and showing which tools are effective for helping to prevent the unnecessary suffering that can result when patients' dying preferences are unknown.

BioPrev-C - development and validation of a contemporary prostate cancer risk calculator.

Objectives: To develop a novel biopsy prostate cancer (PCa) prevention calculator (BioPrev-C) using data from a prospective cohort all undergoing mpMRI targeted and transperineal template saturation biopsy. Materials and methods: Data of all men who underwent prostate biopsy in our academic tertiary care center between 11/2016 and 10/2019 was prospectively collected. We developed a clinical prediction model for the detection of high-grade PCa (Gleason score ≥7) based on a multivariable logistic regression model incorporating age, PSA, prostate volume, digital rectal examination, family history, previous negative biopsy, 5-alpha-reductase inhibitor use and MRI PI-RADS score. BioPrev-C performance was externally validated in another prospective Swiss cohort and compared with two other PCa risk-calculators (SWOP-RC and PBCG-RC). Results: Of 391 men in the development cohort, 157 (40.2%) were diagnosed with high-grade PCa. Validation of the BioPrev C revealed good discrimination with an area under the curve for high-grade PCa of 0.88 (95% Confidence Interval 0.82-0.93), which was higher compared to the other two risk calculators (0.71 for PBCG and 0.84 for SWOP). The BioPrev-C revealed good calibration in the low-risk range (0 - 0.25) and moderate overestimation in the intermediate risk range (0.25 - 0.75). The PBCG-RC showed good calibration and the SWOP-RC constant underestimation of high-grade PCa over the whole prediction range. Decision curve analyses revealed a clinical net benefit for the BioPrev-C at a clinical meaningful threshold probability range (≥4%), whereas PBCG and SWOP calculators only showed clinical net benefit above a 30% threshold probability. Conclusion: BiopPrev-C is a novel contemporary risk calculator for the prediction of high-grade PCa. External validation of the BioPrev-C revealed relevant clinical benefit, which was superior compared to other well-known risk calculators. The BioPrev-C has the potential to significantly and safely reduce the number of men who should undergo a prostate biopsy.

Empowering Patients Through Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer Consultations.

Receiving a breast cancer diagnosis renders breast cancer consultations pivotal moments in a patient's journey, where decisions about treatment options, including breast reconstruction, can profoundly impact their physical and emotional well-being. Shared decision making (SDM) is a collaborative approach that involves healthcare professionals and patients working together to make decisions that align with the patient's values, preferences, and goals. SDM can hence lead to: 1. informed choices and patient empowerment; 2. enhanced patient satisfaction. One of the key decisions that patients face is whether or not to undergo breast reconstruction and the varying options available. However, while SDM has proven benefits, there still appears to be a lack of knowledge among some healthcare professionals. Hence, suggestions for mitigation include the employment of patient decision aids and clear communication strategies.Level of Evidence V This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Interval Cancer in Population-Based Colorectal Screening Programmes: Incidence and Characteristics of Tumours.

The objective of this study is to evaluate interval cancer (IC) in colorectal cancer (CRC) screening, which is CRC diagnosed in an individual after having received a negative faecal occult blood test and before the next invitation to participate in screening. A follow-up study was conducted on a cohort of participants in the first three screening rounds of four colorectal cancer screening programmes in Spain, n = 664,993. A total of 321 ICs and 2120 screen-detected cancers (SCs) were found. The IC and SC rates were calculated for each guaiac (gFOBT) or immunochemical (FIT) test. A Cox regression model was used to estimate the hazard ratios (HR) of IC risk factors. A nested case-control study was carried out to compare IC and SC tumour characteristics. The IC rate was 1.16‱ with the gFOBT and 0.35‱ with the FIT. Men and people aged 60-69 showed an increased probability of IC (HR = 1.81 and HR = 1.95, respectively). There was a decreased probability of IC in individuals who regularly participated in screening, HR = 0.62 (0.47-0.82). IC risk gradually rose as the amount of Hb detected in the FIT increased. IC tumours were in more advanced stages and of a larger size than SC tumours, and they were mostly located in the cecum. These results may play a key role in future strategies for screening programmes, reducing IC incidence.

Decision aids for promoting shared decision-making: A review of systematic reviews.

In the context of shared decision-making (SDM), experts have advocated the use of validated decision aids (DAs) as valuable tools for facilitating SDM in various healthcare scenarios. This comprehensive review attempts to analyze a vast corpus of DA research by performing thorough searches across four prominent databases (PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Web of Science). Independent reviewers selected relevant reviews, extracted data, and assessed review quality using the AMSTAR II tool. A total of 34 systematic reviews were identified and evaluated in this review, encompassing a wide range of outcomes associated with using DAs. These outcomes include patient knowledge, patient involvement in SDM, decision conflict, decision regret, satisfaction, and adherence. In addition, DAs positively affect healthcare provider outcomes by increasing satisfaction, reducing decision conflicts, and lengthening clinical consultations. This review highlights the need for additional research in specific contexts such as long-term care, mental health, and reproductive health to better understand the benefits and challenges of implementing DAs in these settings. Such research can contribute to the improvement of SDM practices and patient-centered care.