Enablers and barriers to using patient decision aids in early stage breast cancer consultations: a qualitative study of surgeons’ views

Implementation Science

Eva Grunfeld³  Erin Kennedy⁵  Marko Simunovic⁴  Tim Whelan⁴  Frances C Wright⁶  Peter Lovrics¹  Cathy Charles²  Mary Ann O’Brien³ 

[1] St. Joseph’s Healthcare, Hamilton, ON, Canada;Department of Clinical Epidemiology and Biostatistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, ON, Canada;Knowledge Translation Research Network, Health Services Research Program, Ontario Institute for Cancer Research, Toronto, ON, Canada;Juravinski Cancer Centre, Hamilton, ON, Canada;Mount Sinai Hospital, University Health Network, Toronto, ON, Canada;Odette Cancer Centre, Toronto, ON, Canada

关键词: Breast cancer surgery;    Decision support tools;    Patient decision aids;   

Others  :  1137074
DOI  :  10.1186/s13012-014-0174-0

 received in 2014-03-28, accepted in 2014-11-08,  发布年份 2014

【 摘 要 】

Background

For early stage breast cancer, randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have shown that patient decision aids (PtDAs), when used by surgeons, result in increased patient knowledge about options and different patient treatment choices as compared to standard care. Yet, recent data suggests that PtDAs are used by less than 25% of Canadian cancer physicians. We conducted a study to explore breast cancer surgeons’ views on enablers and barriers to the use of PtDAs in their practice.

Methods

Purposeful sampling was used to select breast cancer surgeons in three Ontario health regions to participate in semi-structured interviews. Inductive coding and the constant comparative method were used to identify the main themes.

Results

Twenty-two surgeons (79%) agreed to participate (median age, 50 years; 9 (40%) female). Surgeons practiced in academic (n = 7, 32%) or community (n = 15, 68%) hospitals. Fourteen surgeons were aware of PtDAs, nine had used a PtDA with patients as part of an RCT, and six had developed their own informal PtDA for use in their practice. Enablers of informal PtDA use included surgeon exposure during training and surgeon perceived need for a systematic approach when communicating risks and benefits of surgical treatments with patients. Barriers to formal PtDA use included high surgeon confidence in their verbal communication skills, surgeon belief that patients understood conveyed information, and difficulties embedding such tools in practice routines.

Conclusions

Surgeons in this study valued systematic communication with patients. Several surgeons changed their practice to include formal or informal PtDAs provided they perceived there was a clear benefit to themselves or to patients. However, high surgeon confidence in their personal communications skills coupled with beliefs that patients understand conveyed information may be key barriers to PtDA uptake once surgeons have established communication routines.

【 授权许可】

   
2014 O'Brien et al.; licensee BioMed Central Ltd.

【 参考文献 】

• [1]Degner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D, Sloan JA, Carriere KC, O’Neil J, Bilodeau B, Watson P, Mueller B: Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA 1997, 277(18):1485-1492.
• [2]Keating NL, Guadagnoli E, Landrum MB, Borbas C, Weeks JC: Treatment decision making in early-stage breast cancer: should surgeons match patients’ desired level of involvement? J Clin Oncol 2002, 20(6):1473-1479.
• [3]Gattellari M, Butow PN, Tattersall MH: Sharing decisions in cancer care. Soc Sci Med 2001, 52(12):1865-1878.
• [4]Stacey D, Légaré F, Col NF, Bennett CL, Barry MJ, Eden KB, Holmes-Rovner M, Llewellyn-Thomas H, Lyddiatt A, Thomson R, Trevena L, Wu JH: Decision aids for people facing health treatment or screening decisions. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2014, 1:CD001431. doi:10.1002/14651858.CD001431.pub4
• [5]Waljee JF, Rogers MA, Alderman AK: Decision aids and breast cancer: do they influence choice for surgery and knowledge of treatment options? J Clin Oncol 2007, 25(9):1067-1073.
• [6]Obeidat R, Finnell DS, Lally RM: Decision aids for surgical treatment of early stage breast cancer: a narrative review of the literature. Patient Educ Couns 2011, 85(3):e311-e321.
• [7]Neuman HB, Charlson ME, Temple LK: Is there a role for decision aids in cancer-related decisions? Crit Rev Oncol Hematol 2007, 62:240-250.
• [8]Stacey D, Samant R, Bennett C: Decision making in oncology: a review of patient decision aids to support patient participation. CA Cancer J Clin 2008, 58(5):293-304.
• [9]O’Brien MA, Whelan TJ, Villasis-Keever M, Gafni A, Charles C, Roberts R, Schiff S, Cai W: Are cancer-related decision aids effective? A systematic review and meta-analysis. J Clin Oncol 2009, 27:974-985.
• [10]Whelan T, Levine M, Willan A, Gafni A, Sanders K, Mirsky D, Chambers S, O’Brien MA, Reid S, Dubois S: Effect of a decision aid on knowledge and treatment decision making for breast cancer surgery: a randomized trial. JAMA 2004, 292(4):435-441.
• [11]Brace C, Schmocker S, Huang H, Victor JC, McLeod RS, Kennedy ED: Physicians’ awareness and attitudes toward decision aids for patients with cancer. J Clin Oncol 2010, 28(13):2286-2292.
• [12]Caldon LJ, Collins KA, Reed MW, Sivell S, Austoker J, Clements AM, Patnick J, Elwyn G: Clinicians’ concerns about decision support interventions for patients facing breast cancer surgery options: understanding the challenge of implementing shared decision-making. Health Expect 2011, 14(2):133-146. doi:10.1111/j.1369-7625.2010.00633.x
• [13]Feibelmann S, Yang TS, Uzogara EE, Sepucha K: What does it take to have sustained use of decision aids? A programme evaluation for the Breast Cancer Initiative. Health Expect 2011, 14(Suppl 1):85-95.
• [14]Elwyn G, Légaré F, van der Weijden T, Edwards A, May C: Arduous implementation: does the Normalisation Process Model explain why it’s so difficult to embed decision support technologies for patients in routine clinical practice. Implement Sci 2008, 3:57. doi:10.1186/1748-5908-3-57 BioMed Central Full Text
• [15]Harrison JD, Masya L, Butow P, Solomon M, Young J, Salkeld G, Whelan T: Implementing patient decision support tools: moving beyond academia? Patient Educ Couns 2009, 76(1):120-125. doi:10.1016/j.pec.2008.12.013
• [16]Pope C, van Royen P, Baker R: Qualitative methods in research on healthcare quality. Qual Saf Health Care 2002, 11(2):148-152. doi:10.1136/qhc.11.2.148
• [17]Whelan TJ, Gafni A, Julian J, Sebaldt RJ, Tozer R, Heller B, Ellis P, Hodgson N, Mukherjee S, Levine MN: A randomized trial of computer and pamphlet-based versions of the Decision Board (DB). June 20 Suppl 2007, 25:6508. 2007 ASCO Annual Meeting Proceedings (Post-Meeting Edition)
• [18]Grol R, Wensing M: What drives change? Barriers to and incentives for achieving evidence-based practice. 6 Suppl 2004, 180:S57-S60. 13
• [19]Bowen G: Grounded theory and sensitizing concepts. Int J Qual Methods 2006, 5(3):12-23.
• [20]Crabtree B, Miller W: Doing Qualitative Research. 2nd edition. Sage Publications, London; 1999.
• [21]Glaser BG, Strauss AL: The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research. Aldine, Chicago; 1967.
• [22]Charmaz K: Constructing Grounded Theory. A Practical Guide Through Qualitative Analysis. Sage Publications, Thousand Oaks, CA; 2006.
• [23]Boeije H: A purposeful approach to the constant comparative method in the analysis of qualitative data. Qual Quant 2002, 36:391-409.
• [24]Guba EG, Lincoln YS: Fourth Generation Evaluation. Sage Publications, Newbury Park; 1989.
• [25]Rogers EM: Diffusion of Innovations. 4th edition. Free Press, New York; 1995.
• [26]Grilli R, Lomas J: Evaluating the message: the relationship between compliance rate and the subject of a practice guideline. Med Care 1994, 32(3):202-213.
• [27]Simunovic M, Coates A, Smith A, Thabane L, Goldsmith CH, Levine MN: Uptake of an innovation in surgery: observations from the cluster-randomized Quality Initiative in Rectal Cancer trial. Can J Surg 2013, 56(6):415-421.
• [28]Simunovic M, Coates A, Goldsmith CH, Thabane L, Reeson D, Smith A, McLeod RS, DeNardi F, Whelan TJ, Levine MN: The cluster-randomized Quality Initiative in Rectal Cancer trial: evaluating a quality-improvement strategy in surgery. CMAJ 2010, 182(12):1301-1306.
• [29]Wright FC, Gagliardi AR, Law CH, Last LD, Klevan AE, Hongjinda S, Stitt LW, Klar N, Ryan DP, Smith AJ: A randomized controlled trial to improve lymph node assessment in stage II colon cancer. Arch Surg 2008, 143(11):1050-1055.
• [30]Elwyn G, Rix A, Holt T, Jones D: Why do clinicians not refer patients to online decision support tools? Interviews with front line clinics in the NHS. BMJ Open 2012, 2:e001530. doi:10.1136/bmjopen-2012-001530
• [31]Légaré F, Ratté S, Gravel K, Graham ID: Barriers and facilitators to implementing shared decision-making in clinical practice: update of a systematic review of health professionals’ perceptions. Patient Educ Couns 2008, 73:526-535.
• [32]Urquhart R, Porter GA, Grunfeld E, Sargeant J: Exploring the interpersonal-, organization-, and system-level factors that influence the implementation and use of an innovation-synoptic reporting-in cancer care. Implement Sci 2012, 7:12. BioMed Central Full Text
• [33]Hsu C, Liss DT, Westbrook EO, Arterburn D: Incorporating patient decision aids into standard clinical practice in an integrated delivery system. Med Decis Making 2013, 33(1):85-97.
• [34]Elwyn G, Lloyd A, Joseph-Williams N, Cording E, Thomson R, Durand MA, Edwards A: Option Grids: shared decision making made easier. Patient Educ Couns 2013, 90(2):207-212.