scholarly journals Study protocol: Randomized controlled trial of web-based decision support tools for high-risk women and healthcare providers to increase breast cancer chemoprevention

2019 ◽  
Vol 16 ◽  
pp. 100433
Author(s):  
Katherine D. Crew ◽  
Thomas B. Silverman ◽  
Alejandro Vanegas ◽  
Meghna S. Trivedi ◽  
Jill Dimond ◽  
...  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Tarsha Jones ◽  
Ashlee Guzman ◽  
Thomas Silverman ◽  
Katherine Freeman-Costin ◽  
Rita Kukafka ◽  
...  

BACKGROUND : Chemopreventive agents such as selective estrogen receptor modulators (SERMs) and aromatase inhibitors (AIs) have proven efficacy in reducing breast cancer risk by 41%-79% in high risk women. Women at high risk of developing breast cancer face the complex decision of whether to take SERMs or AIs for breast cancer chemoprevention. RealRisks, is a patient-centered web-based decision aid (DA) that was designed to promote understanding of breast cancer risk and to engage diverse women in planning a preference-sensitive course of decision-making about taking chemoprevention. OBJECTIVE We aimed to understand perceptions of women at high-risk for developing breast cancer regarding their experience using RealRisks, a DA designed to promote uptake of breast cancer chemoprevention and to understand their information needs. METHODS We completed enrollment to a randomized controlled trial (RCT) among 300 racially/ethnically diverse women at high-risk of breast cancer, who were assigned to standard educational materials alone or in combination with RealRisks. We conducted semi-structured interviews with a subset of 27 high-risk women enrolled in the intervention arm of the RCT who initially accessed the tool on average one-year prior, to understand how they interacted with the tool. All interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim, and compared against the digital audio recordings to ensure accuracy of the content. We used content analysis to generate themes. RESULTS The mean age of the 27 participants was 60.9 years (SD=10.3). Participants were 18.5% non-Hispanic black, 14.8% Hispanic/Latina, and 3.7% Asian. Most participants (78%) reported using RealRisks after being granted access to the DA. Four overarching themes emerged from the qualitative analyses: (1) acceptability of the intervention, (2) specifically endorsed elements of the DA, (3) recommendations for improvements, and (4) information needs. Most women who used RealRisks found it acceptable (n=21/27) and considered it to be helpful. Most women (n=13/21) reported that RealRisks was easy to navigate, user-friendly, and easily accessible online. The majority felt that RealRisks improved their knowledge about breast cancer risk and chemoprevention options (n=18/21), and that RealRisks informed their decision-making about whether or not to take chemoprevention (n=17/21). Some women (n=9/21) shared recommendations for improvements, as they wanted more tailoring based upon user characteristics, felt the DA was targeting a narrow population of Hispanic/Latina by using graphic novel-style narratives, wanted more understandable terminology, and felt that the tool had too strong of an emphasis on chemoprevention drugs. Participants also shared their information needs on mammography screening frequency and modifiable lifestyle factors. CONCLUSIONS This qualitative study has demonstrated the acceptability of the RealRisks web-based DA among a diverse group of high-risk women with some recommendations for improvement. These results emphasize the need for more tailoring of the DA based on user characteristics, a comprehensive approach to reducing breast cancer risk, and information needs.


Cancer ◽  
2014 ◽  
Vol 121 (6) ◽  
pp. 893-899 ◽  
Author(s):  
Alyse E. Wheelock ◽  
Meredith A. Bock ◽  
Eva L. Martin ◽  
Jimmy Hwang ◽  
Mary Lou Ernest ◽  
...  

2015 ◽  
Vol 21 (4) ◽  
pp. 377-386 ◽  
Author(s):  
Laura L. Reimers ◽  
Parijatham S. Sivasubramanian ◽  
Dawn Hershman ◽  
Mary Beth Terry ◽  
Heather Greenlee ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 4-11
Author(s):  
Andrea Jutta Loizeau ◽  
Simon M. Cohen ◽  
Susan L. Mitchell ◽  
Nathan Theill ◽  
Stefanie Eicher ◽  
...  

Background: Assisted dying and continuous deep sedation (CDS) are controversial practices. Little is known about the perceptions of physicians and surrogates about these practices for patients with advanced dementia. Objectives: To describe and compare physician and surrogate agreement with the use of assisted dying and CDS in advanced dementia. Design, Setting, Subjects: Physicians (n = 64) and surrogates (n = 168) of persons with advanced dementia were recruited as part of a randomized controlled trial in Switzerland that tested decision support tools in this population. Methods: At baseline, the participants were asked about their agreement with assisted dying and CDS in advanced dementia using the following response options: “completely agree,” “somewhat agree,” “somewhat disagree,” “completely disagree,” and “do not know.” Multivariable logistic regressions compared the likelihood that surrogates versus physicians would completely or somewhat agree (vs. completely or somewhat disagree) with these practices. Results: The physicians and surrogates, respectively, had a mean age (SD) of 50.6 years (9.9) and 57.4 years (14.6); 46.9% (n = 30/64) and 68.9% (n = 115/167) were women. A total of 20.3% (n = 13/64) of the physicians and 47.0% (n = 79/168) of the surrogates agreed with assisted dying in advanced dementia. Surrogates were significantly more likely to agree with this practice than physicians (adjusted odds ratio, 3.87; 95% CI: 1.94, 7.69). With regard to CDS, 51.6% (n = 33/64) of the physicians and 41.9% (n = 70/169) of the surrogates agreed with this practice, which did not differ significantly between the groups. Conclusions: The surrogates were more agreeable to considering assisted dying in the setting of advanced dementia than the physicians, and about half of the participants in both groups reported CDS to be an appropriate option for this population.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document