Restricted mean survival time versus conventional effect summary for treatment decision-making: A mixed-methods study

被引:1
|
作者
Shi, Sandra M. [1 ]
Palmer, Jennifer A. [2 ]
Newmeyer, Natalie [1 ]
Carroll, Danette [1 ]
Steinberg, Nessa [1 ]
Olivieri-Mui, Brianne [1 ,3 ]
Kim, Dae Hyun [1 ]
机构
[1] Hebrew SeniorLife, Hinda & Arthur Marcus Inst Aging Res, Boston, MA USA
[2] Boston Univ, Sch Med, Sect Gen Internal Med, Boston, MA 02118 USA
[3] Northeastern Univ, Bouve Coll Hlth Sci, Dept Hlth Sci, Boston, MA 02115 USA
基金
美国国家卫生研究院;
关键词
evidence communication; hypertension; mixed methods; restricted mean survival time; VALIDATION; MORTALITY; TRIAL;
D O I
10.1111/jgs.18107
中图分类号
R592 [老年病学]; C [社会科学总论];
学科分类号
03 ; 0303 ; 100203 ;
摘要
Background: Treatment effect is typically summarized in terms of relative risk reduction or number needed to treat ("conventional effect summary"). Restricted mean survival time (RMST) summarizes treatment effect in terms of a gain or loss in event-free days. Older adults' preference between the two effect summary measures has not been studied. Methods: We conducted a mixed methods study using a quantitative survey and qualitative semi-structured interviews. For the survey, we enrolled 102 residents with hypertension at five senior housing facilities (mean age 81.3 years, 82 female, 95 white race). We randomly assigned respondents to either RMST-based (n = 49) or conventional decision aid (n = 53) about the benefits and harms of intensive versus standard blood pressure-lowering strategies and compared decision conflict scale (DCS) responses (range: 0 [no conflict] to 100 [maximum conflict]; <25 is associated with implementing decisions). We used a purposive sample of 23 survey respondents stratified by both their random assignment and DCS from the survey. Inductive qualitative thematic analysis explored complementary perspectives on preferred ways of summarizing treatment effects. Results: The mean (standard deviation) total DCS was 22.0 (14.3) for the conventional decision aid group and 16.7 (14.1) for the RMST-based decision aid group (p = 0.06), but the proportion of participants with a DCS <25 was higher in the RMST-based group (26 [49.1%] vs 34 [69.4%]; p = 0.04). Qualitative interviews suggested that, regardless of effect summary measure, older individuals' preference depended on their ability to clearly comprehend quantitative information, clarity of presentation in the visual aid, and inclusion of desired information. Conclusions: When choosing a blood pressure-lowering strategy, older adults' perceived uncertainty may be reduced with a time-based effect summary, although our study was underpowered to detect a statistically significant
引用
收藏
页码:528 / 537
页数:10
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Restricted mean survival time versus conventional measures for treatment decision-making
    Kim, Dae Hyun
    Shi, Sandra M.
    Carroll, Danette
    Najafzadeh, Mehdi
    Wei, Lee-Jen
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN GERIATRICS SOCIETY, 2021, 69 (08) : 2282 - 2289
  • [2] Clinical decision-making at the end of life: a mixed-methods study
    Taylor, Paul
    Johnson, Miriam J.
    Dowding, Dawn Wendy
    [J]. BMJ SUPPORTIVE & PALLIATIVE CARE, 2020, 10 (03)
  • [3] Multiethnic Perspectives of Shared Decision-Making in Hypertension: A Mixed-Methods Study
    Elias, Sabrina
    Wenzel, Jennifer
    Cooper, Lisa A.
    Perrin, Nancy
    Commodore-Mensah, Yvonne
    Lewis, Krystina B.
    Koirala, Binu
    Slone, Sarah
    Byiringiro, Samuel
    Marsteller, Jill
    Himmelfarb, Cheryl R.
    [J]. JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN HEART ASSOCIATION, 2024, 13 (14):
  • [4] Understanding decision-making processes of prospective adoptive parents: A mixed-methods study
    Willis, Bethany
    Hrapczynski, Katie
    Fortner, Cheryl
    [J]. FAMILY RELATIONS, 2024,
  • [5] Perspective taking and decision-making in educational game play: A mixed-methods study
    Hilliard, Lacey J.
    Buckingham, Mary H.
    Geldhof, G. John
    Gansert, Patricia
    Stack, Caroline
    Gelgoot, Erin S.
    Bers, Marina U.
    Lerner, Richard M.
    [J]. APPLIED DEVELOPMENTAL SCIENCE, 2018, 22 (01) : 1 - 13
  • [6] Individual Differences in Rater Decision-Making Style: An Exploratory Mixed-Methods Study
    Baker, Beverly Anne
    [J]. LANGUAGE ASSESSMENT QUARTERLY, 2012, 9 (03) : 225 - 248
  • [7] What are the decision-making preferences of patients in vascular surgery? A mixed-methods study
    Santema, T. B. Katrien
    Stoffer, E. Anniek
    Kunneman, Marleen
    Koelemay, Mark J. W.
    Ubbink, Dirk T.
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2017, 7 (02):
  • [8] Patient decision-making and regret in pilonidal sinus surgery: a mixed-methods study
    Strong, Emily
    Callaghan, Tia
    Beal, Erin
    Moffatt, Christine
    Wickramasekera, Nyantara
    Brown, Steven
    Lee, Matthew J.
    Winton, Catherine
    Hind, Daniel
    [J]. COLORECTAL DISEASE, 2021, 23 (06) : 1487 - 1498
  • [9] Interactive Decision-Making in Entertainment Movies: A Mixed-Methods Approach
    Rieger, Diana
    Wulf, Tim
    Riesmeyer, Claudia
    Ruf, Larissa
    [J]. PSYCHOLOGY OF POPULAR MEDIA, 2023, 12 (03) : 294 - 302
  • [10] Cancer treatment decision-making among parents of paediatric oncology patients in Guatemala: a mixed-methods study
    Graetz, Dylan E.
    Rivas, Silvia
    Wang, Huiqi
    Vedaraju, Yuvanesh
    Ferrara, Gia
    Fuentes, Lucia
    Caceres-Serrano, Ana
    Antillon-Klussmann, Federico
    Devidas, Meenakshi
    Metzger, Monika
    Rodriguez-Galindo, Carlos
    Mack, Jennifer W.
    [J]. BMJ OPEN, 2022, 12 (08):