Department of Medical Psychology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Department of Gynecology, University Medical Center Hamburg-Eppendorf, Martinistraße 52, 20246, Hamburg, Germany.
Arch Gynecol Obstet. 2019 Apr;299(4):1141-1149. doi: 10.1007/s00404-018-5035-7. Epub 2019 Jan 16.
Shared decision-making is currently not widely implemented in breast cancer care. Encounter decision aids support shared decision-making by helping patients and physicians compare treatment options. So far, little was known about adaptation needs for translated encounter decision aids, and encounter decision aids for breast cancer treatments were not available in Germany. This study aimed to adapt and evaluate the implementation of two encounter decision aids on breast cancer treatments in routine care.
We conducted a multi-phase qualitative study: (1) translation of two breast cancer Option Grid™ decision aids; comparison to national clinical standards; cognitive interviews to test patients' understanding; (2) focus groups to assess acceptability; (3) testing in routine care using participant observation. Data were analysed using qualitative content analysis.
Physicians and patients reacted positively to the idea of encounter decision aids, and reported being interested in using them; patients were most receptive. Several adaptation cycles were necessary. Uncertainty about feasibility of using encounter decision aids in clinical settings was the main physician-reported barrier. During real-world testing (N = 77 encounters), physicians used encounter decision aids in one-third of potentially relevant encounters. However, they did not use the encounter decision aids to stimulate dialogue, which is contrary to their original scope and purpose.
The idea of using encounter decision aids was welcomed, but more by patients than by physicians. Adaptation was a complex process and required resources. Clinicians did not follow suggested strategies for using encounter decision aids. Our study indicates that production of encounter decision aids alone will not lead to successful implementation, and has to be accompanied by training of health care providers.
目前,在乳腺癌护理中,共同决策并未得到广泛实施。医患会谈决策辅助工具通过帮助患者和医生比较治疗方案来支持共同决策。到目前为止,对于翻译后的医患会谈决策辅助工具的适应需求知之甚少,并且德国还没有用于乳腺癌治疗的医患会谈决策辅助工具。本研究旨在调整并评估两种用于常规护理中乳腺癌治疗的医患会谈决策辅助工具的实施情况。
我们进行了一个多阶段的定性研究:(1)翻译两种乳腺癌 Option Grid 决策辅助工具;与国家临床标准进行比较;进行认知访谈以测试患者的理解能力;(2)进行焦点小组讨论以评估可接受性;(3)使用参与者观察在常规护理中进行测试。使用定性内容分析对数据进行分析。
医生和患者对医患会谈决策辅助工具的想法反应积极,并表示有兴趣使用;患者的接受程度最高。需要进行多个适应周期。在临床环境中使用医患会谈决策辅助工具的可行性存在不确定性,这是医生报告的主要障碍。在真实世界的测试中(N=77 次就诊),医生在三分之一可能相关的就诊中使用了医患会谈决策辅助工具。然而,他们并没有利用医患会谈决策辅助工具来激发对话,这与它们的原始范围和目的相悖。
使用医患会谈决策辅助工具的想法受到了欢迎,但更多的是患者而不是医生。适应是一个复杂的过程,需要资源。临床医生没有遵循使用医患会谈决策辅助工具的建议策略。我们的研究表明,仅制作医患会谈决策辅助工具不会导致成功实施,还必须伴随着医疗保健提供者的培训。