Department of Psychiatry, Section Medical Psychology and Psychotherapy, Erasmus MC - University Medical Centre, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Department of Surgery, Erasmus MC - University Medical Centre, Dr. Molewaterplein 40 P.O. Box 2040, Suite Na-2119, 3015 GD, Rotterdam, Netherlands.
Curr Oncol Rep. 2020 Jul 28;22(10):101. doi: 10.1007/s11912-020-00962-3.
Medical decisions concerning active surveillance are complex, especially when evidence on superiority of one of the treatments is lacking. Decision aids have been developed to facilitate shared decision-making on whether to pursue an active surveillance strategy. However, it is unclear how these decision aids are designed and which outcomes are considered relevant. The purpose of this study is to systematically review all decision aids in the field of oncological active surveillance strategies and outcomes used by authors to assess their efficacy.
A search was performed in Embase, Medline, Web of Science, Cochrane, PsycINFO Ovid and Google Scholar until June 2019. Eligible studies concerned interventions aiming to facilitate shared decision-making for patients confronted with several treatment alternatives, with active surveillance being one of the treatment alternatives. Twenty-three eligible articles were included. Twenty-one articles included patients with prostate cancer, one with thyroid cancer and one with ovarian cancer. Interventions mostly consisted of an interactive web-based decision aid format. After categorization of outcomes, seven main groups were identified: knowledge, involvement in decision-making, decisional conflict, treatment preference, decision regret, anxiety and health-related outcomes. Although active surveillance has been implemented for several malignancies, interventions that facilitate shared decision-making between active surveillance and other equally effective treatment alternatives are scarce. Future research should focus on developing interventions for malignancies like rectal cancer and oesophageal cancer as well. The efficacy of interventions is mostly assessed using short-term outcomes.
涉及主动监测的医学决策非常复杂,特别是当缺乏一种治疗方法具有优势的证据时。决策辅助工具已经被开发出来,以促进关于是否采用主动监测策略的共同决策。然而,目前尚不清楚这些决策辅助工具是如何设计的,以及哪些结果被认为是相关的。本研究的目的是系统地回顾所有在肿瘤主动监测策略领域的决策辅助工具以及作者用来评估其疗效的相关结果。
在 2019 年 6 月之前,我们在 Embase、Medline、Web of Science、Cochrane、PsycINFO Ovid 和 Google Scholar 中进行了检索。符合条件的研究涉及旨在为面临多种治疗选择的患者促进共同决策的干预措施,其中主动监测是治疗选择之一。共纳入 23 篇符合条件的文章。21 篇文章纳入了前列腺癌患者,1 篇纳入了甲状腺癌患者,1 篇纳入了卵巢癌患者。干预措施主要包括基于网络的交互式决策辅助工具。在对结果进行分类后,确定了七个主要组别:知识、参与决策、决策冲突、治疗偏好、决策后悔、焦虑和健康相关结果。尽管已经在几种恶性肿瘤中实施了主动监测,但促进主动监测与其他同样有效的治疗选择之间的共同决策的干预措施却很少。未来的研究应重点开发针对直肠癌和食管癌等恶性肿瘤的干预措施。干预措施的效果主要通过短期结果进行评估。