A scattered landscape: assessment of the evidence base for 71 patient decision aids developed in a hospital setting

Background Recent publications reveal shortcomings in evidence review and summarization methods for patient decision aids. In the large-scale "Share to Care (S2C)" Shared Decision Making (SDM) project at the University Hospital Kiel, Germany, one of 4 SDM interventions was to develop up to 80 decision aids for patients. Best available evidence on the treatments' impact on patient-relevant outcomes was systematically appraised to feed this information into the decision aids. Aims of this paper were to (1) describe how PtDAs are developed and how S2C evidence reviews for each PtDA are conducted, (2) appraise the quality of the best available evidence identified and (3) identify challenges associated with identified evidence. Methods The quality of the identified evidence was assessed based on GRADE quality criteria and categorized into high-, moderate-, low-, very low-quality evidence. Evidence appraisal was conducted across all outcomes assessed in an evidence review and for specific groups of outcomes, namely mortality, morbidity, quality of life, and treatment harms. Challenges in evidence interpretation and summarization resulting from the characteristics of decision aids and the type and quality of evidence are identified and discussed. Conclusions Evidence reviews in this project were carefully conducted and summarized. However, the evidence identified for our decision aids was indeed a "scattered landscape" and often poor quality. Facing a high prevalence of low-quality, non-directly comparative evidence for treatment alternatives doesn't mean it is not necessary to choose an evidence-based approach to inform patients. While there is an urgent need for high quality comparative trials, best available evidence nevertheless has to be appraised and transparently communicated to patients

Self-reported fatigue in patients with rheumatoid arthritis compared to patients with cancer: results from two large-scale studies

Fatigue is a common symptom in patients with rheumatoid arthritis (RA) and in patients with cancer (CA). The aim was to investigate the degree of fatigue in RA patients as compared to CA patients as well as potential influencing factors on RA-related fatigue. This was a retrospective analyses of two prospective cohort studies that used the EORTC QLQ-FA12 as a common instrument to assess fatigue. The cohort of RA patients was based on a nationwide survey in Germany. The cohort of CA patients was recruited in the context of an international validation field study. Multivariable ANCOVAs compared levels of fatigue between the two cohorts, also including various subgroup analyses. Regression analyses explored influencing factors on RA patients’ fatigue. Data of n = 705 RA patients and of n = 943 CA patients were available for analyses. RA patients reported significantly higher Physical Fatigue (mean difference = 7.0, 95% CI 4.2–9.7, p < 0.001) and Social Sequelae (mean difference = 7.5, 95% CI 4.7–10.2, p < 0.001). CA patients reported higher Cognitive Fatigue (mean difference = 3.5, 95% CI 1.4–5.6, p = 0.001). No differences in Emotional Fatigue (p = 0.678) and Interference with Daily Life (p = 0.098) were found. In RA patients, mental health and pain were associated with fatigue (p values < 0.001). RA patients showed a considerable level of fatigue that is comparable to and in certain cases even higher than that of CA patients. The implementation of standardized diagnostic procedures and interventions to reduce fatigue in RA patients are recommended