What Is the Effectiveness of Patient Decision Aids for Cancer-Related Decisions? A Systematic Review Subanalysis

被引:69
|
作者
McAlpine, Kristen [1 ]
Lewis, Krystina B. [1 ]
Trevena, Lyndal J. [3 ]
Stacey, Dawn [1 ,2 ]
机构
[1] Univ Ottawa, Ottawa, ON, Canada
[2] Ottawa Hosp Res Inst, 501 Smyth Rd,Box 511, Ottawa, ON K1H 8L6, Canada
[3] Univ Sydney, Sydney, NSW, Australia
来源
关键词
D O I
10.1200/CCI.17.00148
中图分类号
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号
100214 ;
摘要
Purpose To determine the effectiveness of patient decision aids when used with patients who face cancer-related decisions. Patients and Methods Two reviewers independently screened the 105 trials in the original 2017 Cochrane review to identify eligible trials of patient decision aids across the cancer continuum. Primary outcomes were attributes of the choice and decision-making process. Secondary outcomes were patient behavior and health system effects. A meta-analysis was conducted for similar outcome measures. Results Forty-six trials evaluated patient decision aids for cancer care, including 27 on screening decisions (59%), 12 on treatments (26%), four on genetic testing (9%), and three on prevention (6%). Common decisions were aboutprostate cancer screening (30%), colorectal cancer screening (22%), breast cancer treatment (13%), and prostate cancer treatment (9%). Compared with the control groups (usual care or alternative interventions), the patient decision aid group improved the match between the chosen option and the features that mattered most to the patient as demonstrated by improved knowledge (weighted mean difference, 12.88 of 100; 95% CI, 9.87 to 15.89; 24 trials), accurate risk perception (risk ratio [RR], 1.77; 95% CI, 1.22 to 2.56; six trials), and value-choice agreement (RR, 2.76; 95% CI, 1.57 to 4.84; nine trials). Compared with controls, the patient decision aid group improved the decision-making process with decreased decisional conflict (weighted mean difference, -9.56 of 100; 95% CI, -13.90 to -5.23; 12 trials), reduced clinician-controlled decision making (RR, 0.57; 95% CI, 0.41 to 0.79; eight trials), and fewer patients being indecisive (RR, 0.59; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.78; nine trials). Conclusion Patient decision aids improve the attributes of the choice made and decision-making process for patients who face cancer-related decisions. (C) 2018 by American Society of Clinical Oncology
引用
收藏
页数:13
相关论文
共 50 条
  • [1] Is there a role for decision aids in cancer-related decisions?
    Neuman, Heather B.
    Charlson, Mary E.
    Temple, Larissa K.
    [J]. CRITICAL REVIEWS IN ONCOLOGY HEMATOLOGY, 2007, 62 (03) : 240 - 250
  • [2] Are Cancer-Related Decision Aids Effective? A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis
    O'Brien, Mary Ann
    Whelan, Timothy J.
    Villasis-Keever, Miguel
    Gafni, Amiram
    Charles, Cathy
    Roberts, Robin
    Schiff, Susan
    Cai, Wenjie
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ONCOLOGY, 2009, 27 (06) : 974 - 985
  • [3] THE IMPORTANCE OF PATIENT DECISION AIDS FOR DECISIONS ABOUT CANCER TREATMENT: A QUALITATIVE SYSTEMATIC REVIEW
    Huang, Li-Ting
    Doorenbos, Ardith
    Mathew, Asha
    Jang, Min Kyeong
    Mayahara, Masako
    [J]. ONCOLOGY NURSING FORUM, 2022, 49 (02) : 55 - 55
  • [4] Wilfully out of sight? A literature review on the effectiveness of cancer-related decision aids and implementation strategies
    Herrmann, Anne
    Mansfield, Elise
    Hall, Alix E.
    Sanson-Fisher, Rob
    Zdenkowski, Nicholas
    [J]. BMC MEDICAL INFORMATICS AND DECISION MAKING, 2016, 16
  • [5] Wilfully out of sight? A literature review on the effectiveness of cancer-related decision aids and implementation strategies
    Anne Herrmann
    Elise Mansfield
    Alix E. Hall
    Rob Sanson-Fisher
    Nicholas Zdenkowski
    [J]. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making, 16
  • [6] The cost-effectiveness of patient decision aids: A systematic review
    Trenamana, Logan
    Bryan, Stirling
    Bansbacka'L, Nick
    [J]. HEALTHCARE-THE JOURNAL OF DELIVERY SCIENCE AND INNOVATION, 2014, 2 (04): : 251 - 257
  • [7] What if?: Regret and cancer-related decisions
    Feldman-Stewart, Deb
    Siemens, D. Robert
    [J]. CUAJ-CANADIAN UROLOGICAL ASSOCIATION JOURNAL, 2015, 9 (9-10): : 295 - +
  • [8] A systematic review of the effectiveness of patient-based educational interventions to improve cancer-related pain
    Oldenmenger, Wendy H.
    Geerling, Jenske I.
    Mostovaya, Irina
    Vissers, Kris C. P.
    de Graeff, Alexander
    Reyners, Anna K. L.
    van der Linden, Yvette M.
    [J]. CANCER TREATMENT REVIEWS, 2018, 63 : 96 - 103
  • [9] Patient education for breast cancer-related lymphedema: a systematic review
    Perdomo, Marisa
    Davies, Claire
    Levenhagen, Kimberly
    Ryans, Kathryn
    Gilchrist, Laura
    [J]. JOURNAL OF CANCER SURVIVORSHIP, 2023, 17 (02) : 384 - 398
  • [10] Patient education programs for cancer-related fatigue: A systematic review
    Du, Shizheng
    Hu, Lingli
    Dong, Jianshu
    Xu, Guihua
    Jin, Shengji
    Zhang, Heng
    Yin, Haiyan
    [J]. PATIENT EDUCATION AND COUNSELING, 2015, 98 (11) : 1308 - 1319