A decision aid regarding treatment options for patients with an asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm: a randomised clinical trial.

OBJECTIVE: Abdominal aortic aneurysm patients tend to be informed inconsistently and incompletely about their disorder and the treatment options open to them. The objective of this trial was to evaluate whether these patients are better informed and experience less decisional conflict regarding their treatment options after viewing a decision aid. DESIGN: A six-centre, randomised clinical trial comparing a decision aid plus regular information versus regular information from the surgeon. METHODS: Included patients had recently been diagnosed with an asymptomatic abdominal aortic aneurysm at least 4 cm in diameter. The decision aid consisted of a one-time viewing of an interactive CD-ROM elaborating on elective surgery versus watchful waiting. Generally, the decision aid advised patients with aneurysms less than 5.5 cm to agree to watchful waiting, for larger aneurysms the decision aid provided insight into the balance of benefit and harm of surgical and conservative approaches, taking into account age, co-morbidity and size of the aneurysm. The primary outcome was patient decisional conflict measured at 1 month follow-up (Decisional Conflict Scale). Secondary outcomes were patient knowledge, anxiety and satisfaction. RESULTS: In 178 aneurysm patients, decisional conflict scores did not differ significantly between the decision aid and the regular information groups (22 vs. 24 on the 0-100 Decisional Conflict Scale; p = .33). Patients in the decision aid group had significantly better knowledge (10.0 vs. 9.4 out of 13 points; p = .04), whereas anxiety levels (4.4 and 5.0 on a 0-21 scale; p = .73) and satisfaction scores (74 and 73 on a 0-100 scale; p = .81) were similar in both groups. CONCLUSION: In addition to regular patient-surgeon communication, a decision aid helps to share treatment decisions with abdominal aortic aneurysm patients by increasing their knowledge about the disorder and available treatment options without raising anxiety levels; however, it does not reduce decisional conflict, nor does it improve satisfaction.

Validation of the Simulator for Testing and Rating Endovascular SkillS (STRESS)-machine in a setting of competence testing.

AIM: Endovascular skills are an integral part of modern-day vascular surgery. The STRESS machine has been developed to test these skills in vascular surgeons. This study aims to define an optimal pass/fail cutoff value for the STRESS test score. METHODS: The STRESS machine consists of a dry glass model of the abdominal aorta and its tributaries with various stenotic lesions, elongations, and tortuosities. A camera and computer software are used to simulate plain fluoroscopy-mode. The test subjects are given two assignments after which two reviewers use a combination of the ICEPS and MRS to produce the final total score; 43 subjects were tested. According to previous endovascular experience, subjects were classified into four groups: novice-low (no experience, less than 11 performed procedures, less than 50 assisted procedures), novice-high (11-25 performed procedures, more than 50 assisted procedures), intermediate (1-10 performed and >11-25 assisted procedures, 11-25 performed and >1-10 assisted procedures or 25-50 performed procedures) and advanced (more than 50 performed procedures). RESULTS: Test-score and noted experience showed a correlation of 0.794. All intermediate and advanced test subjects scored more than 50 points compared to 4 out of 15 novices. CONCLUSION: We demonstrated that it is possible to determine an optimal cut-off value for competence testing with the STRESS machine.

Assessing endovascular skills using the Simulator for Testing and Rating Endovascular Skills (STRESS) machine.

OBJECTIVES: Endovascular techniques are an integral part of modern-day vascular surgery practice and training. Nevertheless, validated in vitro assessment tools for these skills are scarce. This study describes the development and pilot testing of the Simulator for Testing and Rating Endovascular Skills (STRESS machine). DESIGN: The design was kept straightforward and compact, without the need for contrast or fluoroscopy. A specific technical skill score was designed analogous to the Imperial College Evaluation of Procedural Skill (ICEPS), an assessment score for open surgical skill. This score was combined with an already validated global rating assessment to form the total score (TS). METHODS: A pilot study was carried out on 18 candidates of varying levels of expertise: novice, intermediate and expert, who were assessed by two independent observers to test inter-observer reliability. RESULTS: Inter-observer reliability was excellent, Cronbach's alpha coefficient of the TS was 0.94 (95% confidence interval: 0.84-0.97). A one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) showed a significant difference between the novice and expert groups (p<0.001), between the novice and intermediate groups (p<0.01) and between the intermediate and expert groups (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: The STRESS machine, in combination with the specific technical skill score and global rating assessment, provides a reliable method of discriminating between the novice, intermediate and expert candidates with excellent inter-observer variability.