A theory-based decision aid for patients with cancer: Results of feasibility and acceptability testing of DecisionKEYS for cancer

Patricia J. Hollen, Richard J. Gralla, Randy A. Jones, Christopher Y. Thomas, David R. Brenin, Geoffrey R. Weiss, Anneke T. Schroen, Gina R. Petroni

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Purpose: Appropriate utilization of treatment is a goal for all patients undergoing cancer treatment. Proper treatment maximizes benefit and limits exposure to unnecessary measures. This report describes findings of the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a short, clinic-based decision aid and presents an in-depth clinical profile of the participants. Methods: This descriptive study used a prospective, quantitative approach to obtain the feasibility and acceptability of a decision aid (DecisionKEYS for Balancing Choices) for use in clinical settings. It combined results of trials of patients with three different common malignancies. All groups used the same decision aid series. Participants included 80 patients with solid tumors (22 with newly diagnosed breast cancer, 19 with advanced prostate cancer, and 39 with advanced lung cancer) and their 80 supporters as well as their physicians and nurses, for a total of 160 participants and 10 health professionals. Results: The decision aid was highly acceptable to patient and supporter participants in all diagnostic groups. It was feasible for use in clinic settings; the overall value was rated highly. Of six physicians, all found the interactive format with the help of the nurse as feasible and acceptable. Nurses also rated the decision aid favorably. Conclusions: This intervention provides the opportunity to enhance decision making about cancer treatment and warrants further study including larger and more diverse groups. Strengths of the study included a theoretical grounding, feasibility testing of a practical clinic-based intervention, and summative evaluation of acceptability of the intervention by patient and supporter pairs. Further research also is needed to test the effectiveness of the decision aid in diverse clinical settings and to determine if this intervention can decrease overall costs.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)889-899
Number of pages11
JournalSupportive Care in Cancer
Volume21
Issue number3
DOIs
StatePublished - Mar 2013

Fingerprint

Decision Support Techniques
Neoplasms
Nurses
Physicians
Therapeutics
Lung Neoplasms
Prostatic Neoplasms
Decision Making
Breast Neoplasms
Costs and Cost Analysis
Health
Research

Keywords

  • Decision aid
  • DecisionKEYS
  • Janis and Mann conflict theory of decision making
  • Solid tumors

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Oncology

Cite this

Hollen, P. J., Gralla, R. J., Jones, R. A., Thomas, C. Y., Brenin, D. R., Weiss, G. R., ... Petroni, G. R. (2013). A theory-based decision aid for patients with cancer: Results of feasibility and acceptability testing of DecisionKEYS for cancer. Supportive Care in Cancer, 21(3), 889-899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1603-8

A theory-based decision aid for patients with cancer : Results of feasibility and acceptability testing of DecisionKEYS for cancer. / Hollen, Patricia J.; Gralla, Richard J.; Jones, Randy A.; Thomas, Christopher Y.; Brenin, David R.; Weiss, Geoffrey R.; Schroen, Anneke T.; Petroni, Gina R.

In: Supportive Care in Cancer, Vol. 21, No. 3, 03.2013, p. 889-899.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Hollen, PJ, Gralla, RJ, Jones, RA, Thomas, CY, Brenin, DR, Weiss, GR, Schroen, AT & Petroni, GR 2013, 'A theory-based decision aid for patients with cancer: Results of feasibility and acceptability testing of DecisionKEYS for cancer', Supportive Care in Cancer, vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 889-899. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00520-012-1603-8
Hollen, Patricia J. ; Gralla, Richard J. ; Jones, Randy A. ; Thomas, Christopher Y. ; Brenin, David R. ; Weiss, Geoffrey R. ; Schroen, Anneke T. ; Petroni, Gina R. / A theory-based decision aid for patients with cancer : Results of feasibility and acceptability testing of DecisionKEYS for cancer. In: Supportive Care in Cancer. 2013 ; Vol. 21, No. 3. pp. 889-899.
@article{68cf34400ddf49c0824cdff44e158413,
title = "A theory-based decision aid for patients with cancer: Results of feasibility and acceptability testing of DecisionKEYS for cancer",
abstract = "Purpose: Appropriate utilization of treatment is a goal for all patients undergoing cancer treatment. Proper treatment maximizes benefit and limits exposure to unnecessary measures. This report describes findings of the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a short, clinic-based decision aid and presents an in-depth clinical profile of the participants. Methods: This descriptive study used a prospective, quantitative approach to obtain the feasibility and acceptability of a decision aid (DecisionKEYS for Balancing Choices) for use in clinical settings. It combined results of trials of patients with three different common malignancies. All groups used the same decision aid series. Participants included 80 patients with solid tumors (22 with newly diagnosed breast cancer, 19 with advanced prostate cancer, and 39 with advanced lung cancer) and their 80 supporters as well as their physicians and nurses, for a total of 160 participants and 10 health professionals. Results: The decision aid was highly acceptable to patient and supporter participants in all diagnostic groups. It was feasible for use in clinic settings; the overall value was rated highly. Of six physicians, all found the interactive format with the help of the nurse as feasible and acceptable. Nurses also rated the decision aid favorably. Conclusions: This intervention provides the opportunity to enhance decision making about cancer treatment and warrants further study including larger and more diverse groups. Strengths of the study included a theoretical grounding, feasibility testing of a practical clinic-based intervention, and summative evaluation of acceptability of the intervention by patient and supporter pairs. Further research also is needed to test the effectiveness of the decision aid in diverse clinical settings and to determine if this intervention can decrease overall costs.",
keywords = "Decision aid, DecisionKEYS, Janis and Mann conflict theory of decision making, Solid tumors",
author = "Hollen, {Patricia J.} and Gralla, {Richard J.} and Jones, {Randy A.} and Thomas, {Christopher Y.} and Brenin, {David R.} and Weiss, {Geoffrey R.} and Schroen, {Anneke T.} and Petroni, {Gina R.}",
year = "2013",
month = "3",
doi = "10.1007/s00520-012-1603-8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "21",
pages = "889--899",
journal = "Supportive Care in Cancer",
issn = "0941-4355",
publisher = "Springer Verlag",
number = "3",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - A theory-based decision aid for patients with cancer

T2 - Results of feasibility and acceptability testing of DecisionKEYS for cancer

AU - Hollen, Patricia J.

AU - Gralla, Richard J.

AU - Jones, Randy A.

AU - Thomas, Christopher Y.

AU - Brenin, David R.

AU - Weiss, Geoffrey R.

AU - Schroen, Anneke T.

AU - Petroni, Gina R.

PY - 2013/3

Y1 - 2013/3

N2 - Purpose: Appropriate utilization of treatment is a goal for all patients undergoing cancer treatment. Proper treatment maximizes benefit and limits exposure to unnecessary measures. This report describes findings of the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a short, clinic-based decision aid and presents an in-depth clinical profile of the participants. Methods: This descriptive study used a prospective, quantitative approach to obtain the feasibility and acceptability of a decision aid (DecisionKEYS for Balancing Choices) for use in clinical settings. It combined results of trials of patients with three different common malignancies. All groups used the same decision aid series. Participants included 80 patients with solid tumors (22 with newly diagnosed breast cancer, 19 with advanced prostate cancer, and 39 with advanced lung cancer) and their 80 supporters as well as their physicians and nurses, for a total of 160 participants and 10 health professionals. Results: The decision aid was highly acceptable to patient and supporter participants in all diagnostic groups. It was feasible for use in clinic settings; the overall value was rated highly. Of six physicians, all found the interactive format with the help of the nurse as feasible and acceptable. Nurses also rated the decision aid favorably. Conclusions: This intervention provides the opportunity to enhance decision making about cancer treatment and warrants further study including larger and more diverse groups. Strengths of the study included a theoretical grounding, feasibility testing of a practical clinic-based intervention, and summative evaluation of acceptability of the intervention by patient and supporter pairs. Further research also is needed to test the effectiveness of the decision aid in diverse clinical settings and to determine if this intervention can decrease overall costs.

AB - Purpose: Appropriate utilization of treatment is a goal for all patients undergoing cancer treatment. Proper treatment maximizes benefit and limits exposure to unnecessary measures. This report describes findings of the feasibility and acceptability of implementing a short, clinic-based decision aid and presents an in-depth clinical profile of the participants. Methods: This descriptive study used a prospective, quantitative approach to obtain the feasibility and acceptability of a decision aid (DecisionKEYS for Balancing Choices) for use in clinical settings. It combined results of trials of patients with three different common malignancies. All groups used the same decision aid series. Participants included 80 patients with solid tumors (22 with newly diagnosed breast cancer, 19 with advanced prostate cancer, and 39 with advanced lung cancer) and their 80 supporters as well as their physicians and nurses, for a total of 160 participants and 10 health professionals. Results: The decision aid was highly acceptable to patient and supporter participants in all diagnostic groups. It was feasible for use in clinic settings; the overall value was rated highly. Of six physicians, all found the interactive format with the help of the nurse as feasible and acceptable. Nurses also rated the decision aid favorably. Conclusions: This intervention provides the opportunity to enhance decision making about cancer treatment and warrants further study including larger and more diverse groups. Strengths of the study included a theoretical grounding, feasibility testing of a practical clinic-based intervention, and summative evaluation of acceptability of the intervention by patient and supporter pairs. Further research also is needed to test the effectiveness of the decision aid in diverse clinical settings and to determine if this intervention can decrease overall costs.

KW - Decision aid

KW - DecisionKEYS

KW - Janis and Mann conflict theory of decision making

KW - Solid tumors

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=84874117049&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=84874117049&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1007/s00520-012-1603-8

DO - 10.1007/s00520-012-1603-8

M3 - Article

C2 - 23052911

AN - SCOPUS:84874117049

VL - 21

SP - 889

EP - 899

JO - Supportive Care in Cancer

JF - Supportive Care in Cancer

SN - 0941-4355

IS - 3

ER -