Winship Cancer Institute, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Department of Hematology and Oncology, Emory University School of Medicine, Atlanta, Georgia, USA.
Psychooncology. 2021 Oct;30(10):1739-1744. doi: 10.1002/pon.5739. Epub 2021 May 31.
Many groups recommend assessment of patient preferences particularly for patients with advanced, incurable cancer. We, therefore, developed the Patient Preference Assessment Tool (PPAT) to ascertain patient preferences in order to inform clinician recommendations and improve shared decision-making. The aim of this study is to assess the PPAT's impact on clinicians' strength of recommendations for phase I oncology clinical trials.
Clinicians recorded the strength of their recommendation on a Likert scale before viewing the patient's PPAT. After viewing the PPAT, the clinician discussed the clinical trial with the patient and then recorded the strength of recommendation again. If there was a change, the clinician noted the reason for the change: clinical findings or patient preference. Clinicians were interviewed about the acceptability of the tool. Our threshold for determining if a change in recommendation due to the PPAT was significant was 20%, given the multiple factors influencing a clinician's recommendation. We also noted the type of phase I conversation observed based on classifications defined in prior work-priming, treatment-options, trial logistics, consent.
N = 29. The strength of the clinicians' recommendations changed due to patient preferences in 7 of 29 (24%) of the conversations. The seven changes due to preferences were all in the 23 treatment-options conversations, for an impact rate of 30% in this type of conversation. 82% of clinicians found the PPAT useful.
The PPAT was impactful in an academic setting, exceeding our 20% impact threshold. This tool helps achieve the important goal of incorporating patient preferences into shared decision-making about clinical trials.
许多团体建议评估患者的偏好,特别是对于晚期、无法治愈的癌症患者。因此,我们开发了患者偏好评估工具(PPAT),以确定患者的偏好,从而为临床医生的建议提供信息,并改善共同决策。本研究的目的是评估 PPAT 对临床医生推荐 I 期肿瘤临床试验的力度的影响。
临床医生在查看患者的 PPAT 之前,根据李克特量表记录他们的推荐强度。查看 PPAT 后,临床医生与患者讨论临床试验,然后再次记录推荐强度。如果有变化,临床医生会记录变化的原因:临床发现或患者偏好。临床医生接受了关于该工具可接受性的访谈。我们确定由于 PPAT 导致推荐发生变化的阈值为 20%,因为影响临床医生推荐的因素很多。我们还根据先前工作中定义的分类记录了观察到的 I 期对话的类型——启动、治疗选择、试验流程、同意。
N=29。在 29 次对话中,有 7 次(24%)由于患者偏好而改变了临床医生的推荐力度。由于偏好而发生的 7 次变化都发生在 23 次治疗选择对话中,这种类型的对话的影响率为 30%。82%的临床医生认为 PPAT 有用。
PPAT 在学术环境中具有影响力,超过了我们 20%的影响阈值。该工具有助于实现将患者偏好纳入临床试验共同决策的重要目标。