The decision evaluation scales

There are several instruments to assess how patients evaluate their medical treatment choice. These are used to evaluate decision aids. Our objective is to investigate which psychological factors play a role when patients evaluate their medical treatment choices. A pool of 36 items was constructed, covering concepts such as uncertainty about and satisfaction with the decision, informed choice, effective decision making, responsibility for the decision, perceived riskiness of the choice, and social support regarding the decision. This pool was presented to patients at high risk for breast and ovarian cancer, awaiting a genetic test result, and facing the choice between prophylactic surgery or screening. Additional measures were assessed for validation purposes. Factor and Rasch analyses were used for factor and item selection. Construct validity of emerging scales was assessed by relating them with the additional measures. Three factors suminarised the psychological factors concerning decision evaluation: Satisfaction-Uncertainty, Informed Choice, and Decision Control. Reliabilities (Cronbach's alpha) of the three scales were 0.79, 0.85, and 0.75, respectively. Construct validity hypotheses were confirmed. The first two scales were similar to previously developed scales. Of these three scales, the Decision Control scale correlated most strongly with the well-being measures, was associated with partner's agreement and physician's preferences as perceived by patients, and with a negative emotional reaction to the information material. In conclusion, the Decision Control scale is a new scale to evaluate decision aids, and it appears to be rooted in health psychological theories. (c) 2004 Elsevier Ireland Ltd. All rights reserved.</p

Randomised trial of a decision aid and its timing for women being tested for a BRCA1/2 mutation

Contains fulltext : 57882.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)The aim of the study was to evaluate the impact of a decision aid (DA) and its timing in women being tested for a BRCA1/2 mutation. Women with and without a previous history of cancer were included after blood sampling for genetic testing. The DA consisted of a brochure and video providing information on screening and prophylactic surgery. To evaluate the impact of the DA, women were randomised to the DA group (n=184), receiving the DA 2 weeks after blood sampling, or to the control group (n=184). To evaluate the impact of timing, mutation carriers who had received the DA before the test result (n=47) were compared to mutation carriers who received the DA after the test result (n=42). Data were collected on well-being, treatment choice, decision and information related outcomes. The impact of the DA was measured 4 weeks after blood sampling. The impact of timing was measured 2 weeks after a positive test result. The DA had no impact on well-being. Regarding decision related outcomes, the DA group more frequently considered prophylactic surgery (P=0.02) corroborated with higher valuations (P=0.04). No differences were found for the other decision related outcomes. Regarding information related outcomes, the DA group felt better informed (P=0.00), was more satisfied with the information (P=0.00), and showed more accurate risk perceptions. Timing of the DA had no effect on any of the outcomes. No interactions were found between the DA and history of cancer. In conclusion, women being tested for a BRCA1/2 mutation benefit from the DA on information related outcomes. Because timing had no effect, the DA is considered useful either before or after the test result

Amniotic fluid embolism incidence, risk factors and outcomes: a review and recommendations

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Amniotic fluid embolism (AFE) is a rare but severe complication of pregnancy. A recent systematic review highlighted apparent differences in the incidence, with studies estimating the incidence of AFE to be more than three times higher in North America than Europe. The aim of this study was to examine population-based regional or national data from five high-resource countries in order to investigate incidence, risk factors and outcomes of AFE and to investigate whether any variation identified could be ascribed to methodological differences between the studies.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>We reviewed available data sources on the incidence of AFE in Australia, Canada, the Netherlands, the United Kingdom and the USA. Where information was available, the risk factors and outcomes of AFE were examined.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>The reported incidence of AFE ranged from 1.9 cases per 100 000 maternities (UK) to 6.1 per 100 000 maternities (Australia). There was a clear distinction between rates estimated using different methodologies. The lowest estimated incidence rates were obtained through validated case identification (range 1.9-2.5 cases per 100 000 maternities); rates obtained from retrospective analysis of population discharge databases were significantly higher (range 5.5-6.1 per 100 000 admissions with delivery diagnosis). Older maternal age and induction of labour were consistently associated with AFE.</p> <p>Conclusions</p> <p>Recommendation 1: Comparisons of AFE incidence estimates should be restricted to studies using similar methodology. The recommended approaches would be either population-based database studies using additional criteria to exclude false positive cases, or tailored data collection using existing specific population-based systems.</p> <p>Recommendation 2: Comparisons of AFE incidence between and within countries would be facilitated by development of an agreed case definition and an agreed set of criteria to minimise inclusion of false positive cases for database studies.</p> <p>Recommendation 3: Groups conducting detailed population-based studies on AFE should develop an agreed strategy to allow combined analysis of data obtained using consistent methodologies in order to identify potentially modifiable risk factors.</p> <p>Recommendation 4: Future specific studies on AFE should aim to collect information on management and longer-term outcomes for both mothers and infants in order to guide best practice, counselling and service planning.</p

BRCA1/2 mutation testing in breast cancer patients: a prospective study of the long-term psychological impact of approach during adjuvant radiotherapy

This study assessed psychological distress during the first year after diagnosis in breast cancer patients approached for genetic counseling at the start of adjuvant radiotherapy and identified those vulnerable to long-term high distress. Of the approached patients some chose to receive a DNA test result (n = 58), some were approached but did not fulfill criteria for referral (n = 118) and some declined counseling and/or testing (n = 44). The comparative group consisted of patients not eligible for genetic counseling (n = 182) and was therefore not approached. Patients actively approached for genetic counseling showed no more long-term distress than patients not eligible for such counseling. There were no differences between the subgroups of approached patients. Predictors for long-term high distress or an increase in distress over time were pre-existing high distress and a low quality of life, having children, and having no family members with breast cancer. It is concluded that breast cancer patients can be systematically screened and approached for genetic counseling during adjuvant radiotherapy without imposing extra psychological burden. Patients vulnerable to long-term high distress already displayed high distress shortly after diagnosis with no influence of their medical treatment on their level of distress at long-term

Cost-effectiveness of MRI compared to mammography for breast cancer screening in a high risk population

<p>Abstract</p> <p>Background</p> <p>Breast magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) is a sensitive method of breast imaging virtually uninfluenced by breast density. Because of the improved sensitivity, breast MRI is increasingly being used for detection of breast cancer among high risk young women. However, the specificity of breast MRI is variable and costs are high. The purpose of this study was to determine if breast MRI is a cost-effective approach for the detection of breast cancer among young women at high risk.</p> <p>Methods</p> <p>A Markov model was created to compare annual breast cancer screening over 25 years with either breast MRI or mammography among young women at high risk. Data from published studies provided probabilities for the model including sensitivity and specificity of each screening strategy. Costs were based on Medicare reimbursement rates for hospital and physician services while medication costs were obtained from the Federal Supply Scale. Utilities from the literature were applied to each health outcome in the model including a disutility for the temporary health state following breast biopsy for a false positive test result. All costs and benefits were discounted at 5% per year. The analysis was performed from the payer perspective with results reported in 2006 U.S. dollars. Univariate and probabilistic sensitivity analyses addressed uncertainty in all model parameters.</p> <p>Results</p> <p>Breast MRI provided 14.1 discounted quality-adjusted life-years (QALYs) at a discounted cost of $18,167 while mammography provided 14.0 QALYs at a cost of$4,760 over 25 years of screening. The incremental cost-effectiveness ratio of breast MRI compared to mammography was $179,599/QALY. In univariate analysis, breast MRI screening became <$50,000/QALY when the cost of the MRI was < $315. In the probabilistic sensitivity analysis, MRI screening produced a net health benefit of -0.202 QALYs (95$50,000/QALY. Breast MRI screening was superior in 0%, < $50,000/QALY in 22$50,000/QALY in 34%, and inferior in 44% of trials.</p> <p>Conclusion</p> <p>Although breast MRI may provide health benefits when compared to mammographic screening for some high risk women, it does not appear to be cost-effective even at willingness to pay thresholds above $120,000/QALY.</p

Risk Factors for Small-for-Gestational-age and Preterm Births among 19,269 Tanzanian Newborns.

Few studies have differentiated risk factors for term-small for gestational age (SGA), preterm-appropriate for gestational age (AGA), and preterm-SGA, despite evidence of varying risk of child mortality and poor developmental outcomes. We analyzed birth outcome data from singleton infants, who were enrolled in a large randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of neonatal vitamin A supplementation conducted in Tanzania. SGA was defined as birth weight <10th percentile for gestation age and sex using INTERGROWTH standards and preterm birth as delivery at <37 complete weeks of gestation. Risk factors for term-SGA, preterm-AGA, and preterm-SGA were examined independently using log-binomial regression. Among 19,269 singleton Tanzanian newborns included in this analysis, 68.3 % were term-AGA, 15.8 % term-SGA, 15.5 % preterm-AGA, and 0.3 % preterm-SGA. In multivariate analyses, significant risk factors for term-SGA included maternal age <20 years, starting antenatal care (ANC) in the 3(rd) trimester, short maternal stature, being firstborn, and male sex (all p < 0.05). Independent risk factors for preterm-AGA were maternal age <25 years, short maternal stature, firstborns, and decreased wealth (all p < 0.05). In addition, receiving ANC services in the 1(st) trimester significantly reduced the risk of preterm-AGA (p = 0.01). Significant risk factors for preterm-SGA included maternal age >30 years, being firstborn, and short maternal stature which appeared to carry a particularly strong risk (all p < 0.05). Over 30 % of newborns in this large urban and rural cohort of Tanzanian newborns were born preterm and/or SGA. Interventions to promote early attendance to ANC services, reduce unintended young pregnancies, increased maternal height, and reduce poverty may significantly decrease the burden of SGA and preterm birth in sub-Saharan Africa

How a Diverse Research Ecosystem Has Generated New Rehabilitation Technologies: Review of NIDILRR’s Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers

Over 50 million United States citizens (1 in 6 people in the US) have a developmental, acquired, or degenerative disability. The average US citizen can expect to live 20% of his or her life with a disability. Rehabilitation technologies play a major role in improving the quality of life for people with a disability, yet widespread and highly challenging needs remain. Within the US, a major effort aimed at the creation and evaluation of rehabilitation technology has been the Rehabilitation Engineering Research Centers (RERCs) sponsored by the National Institute on Disability, Independent Living, and Rehabilitation Research. As envisioned at their conception by a panel of the National Academy of Science in 1970, these centers were intended to take a “total approach to rehabilitation”, combining medicine, engineering, and related science, to improve the quality of life of individuals with a disability. Here, we review the scope, achievements, and ongoing projects of an unbiased sample of 19 currently active or recently terminated RERCs. Specifically, for each center, we briefly explain the needs it targets, summarize key historical advances, identify emerging innovations, and consider future directions. Our assessment from this review is that the RERC program indeed involves a multidisciplinary approach, with 36 professional fields involved, although 70% of research and development staff are in engineering fields, 23% in clinical fields, and only 7% in basic science fields; significantly, 11% of the professional staff have a disability related to their research. We observe that the RERC program has substantially diversified the scope of its work since the 1970’s, addressing more types of disabilities using more technologies, and, in particular, often now focusing on information technologies. RERC work also now often views users as integrated into an interdependent society through technologies that both people with and without disabilities co-use (such as the internet, wireless communication, and architecture). In addition, RERC research has evolved to view users as able at improving outcomes through learning, exercise, and plasticity (rather than being static), which can be optimally timed. We provide examples of rehabilitation technology innovation produced by the RERCs that illustrate this increasingly diversifying scope and evolving perspective. We conclude by discussing growth opportunities and possible future directions of the RERC program

Communication about genetic testing with breast and ovarian cancer patients: a scoping review

© 2018, The Author(s). Genetic testing of patients with cancer is increasingly offered to guide management, resulting in a growing need for oncology health professionals to communicate genetics information and facilitate informed decision-making in a short time frame. This scoping review aimed to map and synthesise what is known about health professionals’ communication about genetic testing for hereditary breast and ovarian cancer with cancer patients. Four databases were systematically searched using a recognised scoping review method. Areas and types of research were mapped and a narrative synthesis of the findings was undertaken. Twenty-nine papers from 25 studies were included. Studies were identified about (i) information needs, (ii) process and content of genetic counselling, (iii) cognitive and emotional impact, including risk perception and recall, understanding and interpretation of genetic test results, and anxiety and distress, (iv) patients’ experiences, (v) communication shortly after diagnosis and (vi) alternatives to face-to-face genetic counselling. Patients’ need for cancer-focused, personalised information is not always met by genetic counselling. Genetic counselling tends to focus on biomedical information at the expense of psychological support. For most patients, knowledge is increased and anxiety is not raised by pre-test communication. However, some patients experience anxiety and distress when results are disclosed, particularly those tested shortly after diagnosis who are unprepared or unsupported. For many patients, pre-test communication by methods other than face-to-face genetic counselling is acceptable. Research is needed to identify patients who may benefit from genetic counselling and support and to investigate communication about hereditary breast and ovarian cancer by oncology health professionals