Mekelenkamp Hilda, Smiers Frans, Camp Nomie, Stubenrouch Fabienne, Lankester Arjan, de Vries Martine
Willem-Alexander Children's Hospital, Department of Pediatrics, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Department of Medical Ethics and Health Law, Leiden University Medical Centre, Leiden, The Netherlands.
Pediatr Blood Cancer. 2021 Sep;68(9):e29099. doi: 10.1002/pbc.29099. Epub 2021 May 18.
Hematopoietic stem cell transplantation (HSCT) offers an established curative option for sickle cell disease (SCD) and thalassemia patients but is associated with significant risks. Decision making is a complex process and shared decision making (SDM) could be a fitting approach in case of such preference-sensitive decisions. This study investigated what level of SDM is used in conversations with hemoglobinopathy patients and/or their caregivers considering HSCT as a curative treatment option.
Longitudinal, descriptive study using the Observing-Patient-Involvement-in-Decision-Making scale (OPTION ) scale to determine the level of SDM in conversations with 26 hemoglobinopathy patients and/or their caregivers.
The total mean OPTION score was 43%, which is a moderate SDM approach. There was no difference between conversations with thalassemia patients and SCD patients. Conversations needing an interpreter scored worse than nontranslated conversations. The best scoring OPTION item was item 3: "informing about the various treatment options" (mean score 2.3 on scale 0-4). For OPTION item 4: "eliciting patients' preferences" a more skilled effort was measured for SCD patients compared to thalassemia patients.
The mean OPTION score of "moderate" was achieved mainly by giving information on available options, which is primarily a one-way communication. The SDM process can be improved by actively inviting patients to deliberate about options and including their elicited preferences in decision making.
造血干细胞移植(HSCT)为镰状细胞病(SCD)和地中海贫血患者提供了一种既定的治愈选择,但也伴随着重大风险。决策是一个复杂的过程,对于这种偏好敏感的决策,共同决策(SDM)可能是一种合适的方法。本研究调查了在与将HSCT作为治愈性治疗选择的血红蛋白病患者和/或其护理人员的对话中,使用了何种程度的共同决策。
采用观察患者参与决策量表(OPTION)进行纵向描述性研究,以确定与26名血红蛋白病患者和/或其护理人员对话中的共同决策水平。
OPTION总分平均为
43%,这是一种中等程度的共同决策方法。与地中海贫血患者和SCD患者的对话之间没有差异。需要口译员的对话得分低于非翻译对话。得分最高的OPTION项目是项目3:“告知各种治疗选择”(0-4分制的平均得分为2.3分)。对于OPTION项目4:“引出患者的偏好”,与地中海贫血患者相比,对SCD患者的测量显示需要更熟练的努力。
“中等”的平均OPTION得分主要是通过提供可用选择的信息来实现的,这主要是一种单向沟通。通过积极邀请患者思考各种选择并将他们引出的偏好纳入决策,可以改进共同决策过程。