Medicine, McMaster University, Hamilton, Canada
Bridgepoint Active Healthcare, Toronto, Ontario, Canada.
BMJ Support Palliat Care. 2022 Dec;12(e6):e777-e784. doi: 10.1136/bmjspcare-2018-001698. Epub 2019 Feb 6.
To develop and validate a values clarification tool, the Short Graphic Values History Tool (GVHT), designed to support person-centred decision making during serious illness.
The development phase included input from experts and laypersons and assessed acceptability with patients/family members. In the validation phase, we recruited additional participants into a before-after study. Our primary validation hypothesis was that the tool would reduce scores on the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) at 1-2 weeks of follow-up. Our secondary validation hypotheses were that the tool would improve values clarity (reduce scores) more than other DCS subscales and increase engagement in advance care planning (ACP) processes related to identification and discussion of one's values.
In the development phase, the tool received positive overall ratings from 22 patients/family members in hospital (mean score 4.3; 1=very poor; 5=very good) and family practice (mean score 4.5) settings. In the validation phase, we enrolled 157 patients (mean age 71.8 years) from family practice, cancer clinic and hospital settings. After tool completion, decisional conflict decreased (-6.7 points, 95% CI -11.1 to -2.3, p=0.003; 0-100 scale; N=100), with the most improvement seen in the values clarity subscale (-10.0 points, 95% CI -17.3 to -2.7, p=0.008; N=100), and the ACP-Values process score increased (+0.4 points, 95% CI 0.2 to 0.6, p=0.001; 1-5 scale; N=61).
The Short GVHT is acceptable to end users and has some measure of validity. Further study to evaluate its impact on decision making during serious illness is warranted.
开发并验证一种价值观澄清工具,即简短图形价值观史工具(GVHT),旨在支持重病患者的以患者为中心的决策。
开发阶段包括专家和非专业人士的投入,并对患者/家属进行了可接受性评估。在验证阶段,我们招募了更多的参与者进行前后研究。我们的主要验证假设是,该工具将在 1-2 周的随访中降低决策冲突量表(DCS)的分数。我们的次要验证假设是,该工具将比其他 DCS 子量表更能提高价值观清晰度(降低分数),并增加与识别和讨论价值观相关的预先护理计划(ACP)流程的参与度。
在开发阶段,该工具在医院(平均得分 4.3;1=非常差;5=非常好)和家庭实践(平均得分 4.5)环境中获得了 22 名患者/家属的积极总体评价。在验证阶段,我们从家庭实践、癌症诊所和医院环境中招募了 157 名患者(平均年龄 71.8 岁)。在工具完成后,决策冲突减少(-6.7 分,95%置信区间-11.1 至-2.3,p=0.003;0-100 分制;N=100),价值观清晰度子量表的改善最为明显(-10.0 分,95%置信区间-17.3 至-2.7,p=0.008;N=100),ACP-Values 流程评分增加(+0.4 分,95%置信区间 0.2 至 0.6,p=0.001;1-5 分制;N=61)。
简短 GVHT 受终端用户的欢迎,具有一定的有效性。需要进一步研究以评估其在严重疾病期间决策的影响。