Ross Levi, Collins Linda, Uzoaru Florida, Preston Michael A
Department of Kinesiology and Health Sciences, Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond, LA 70402, USA.
Department of Health and Human Sciences, Southeastern Louisiana University, Hammond, LA 70402, USA.
Healthcare (Basel). 2024 Oct 4;12(19):1981. doi: 10.3390/healthcare12191981.
BACKGROUND/OBJECTIVES: Effective communication between patients and healthcare providers is essential for informed decision making in cancer care. Communication aids that can help prostate cancer patients optimize their involvement in treatment care planning are not widely used in the U.S. This research details the adaptation and validation process of a patient prompt list for localized prostate cancer patients undergoing treatment decisions.
This process occurred in three steps: Step 1 involved gathering usable questions from the literature; in Step 2, we evaluated the tool's content via expert (N = 6) feedback; and in Step 3, we assessed the usefulness of the prompt list with patients (N = 30).
Sixty percent of candidate questions (20/33) were retained for inclusion after achieving acceptable item-level content validity index (range: 0.83-1.00) and scale-level content validity index (S-CVI = 0.96) scores. The final 20 questions were classified into 5 domains (1: Treatment Options and Information, 2: Side Effects, Risks, and Recovery, 3: Emotional and Social Support, 4: Logistical and Practical Concerns, and 5: Future Health Considerations) through a card sorting exercise with a subset of patients (N = 3) and providers (N = 2). Most patients rated the prompt list as "useful or very useful" both to themselves (80%, N = 24) and to other men presenting with prostate cancer (83%, N = 25).
The participatory process used to develop and validate the prompt list offers insights for the development of similar tools.
背景/目的：患者与医疗服务提供者之间的有效沟通对于癌症治疗中的知情决策至关重要。在美国，能够帮助前列腺癌患者更好地参与治疗护理计划的沟通辅助工具并未得到广泛应用。本研究详细介绍了针对正在进行治疗决策的局限性前列腺癌患者的患者提示清单的改编和验证过程。
该过程分三步进行：第一步是从文献中收集可用问题；第二步，我们通过专家（N = 6）反馈评估该工具的内容；第三步，我们评估了提示清单对患者（N = 30）的有用性。
在获得可接受的条目级内容效度指数（范围：0.83 - 1.00）和量表级内容效度指数（S - CVI = 0.96）分数后，60%的候选问题（20/33）被保留纳入。通过与一部分患者（N = 3）和医疗服务提供者（N = 2）进行卡片分类练习，最终的20个问题被分为5个领域（1：治疗选择与信息，2：副作用、风险与恢复，3：情感与社会支持，4：后勤与实际问题，5：未来健康考虑）。大多数患者认为提示清单对自己（80%，N = 24）和其他患有前列腺癌的男性（83%，N = 25）“有用或非常有用”。
用于开发和验证提示清单的参与式过程为类似工具的开发提供了见解。
