Abstract 215: Differing Perspectives Between Physicians, Patients And Caregivers On The Value Of An Individualized Estimate Of The Benefits Of Thrombolysis At The Time Of Acute Ischemic Stroke: Designing The Resolve (Rapid Evaluation for Stroke Outcomes using Lytics in Vascular Event) Decision Aid

Background: Explaining the risks and benefits of recombinant tissue plasminogen activator (rt-PA) occurs in a hurried conversation in the emergency department and may not be fully grasped by patients and their caregivers. Risk models describing the heterogeneity of benefits from rt-PA in acute ischemic stroke (AIS) have been created, but are not used in routine clinical practice. To develop a tool (RESOLVE) for modeling each patient’s benefits and risks for rt-PA, we conducted qualitative interviews with survivors, their caregivers and emergency physicians to inform the design and improve usability. Methods: A multidisciplinary research team conducted qualitative research through 10 focus groups of survivors and caregivers. We obtained feedback on their preferred role, desired information and their impressions of alternative formats for presenting risk and benefits. Three emergency physicians from 2 sites have been interviewed (with >15 additional physician interviews being currently conducted, the results of which will supplement these preliminary data at the time of presentation). Results: Survivors and caregivers (63 participants: 39 stroke survivors; 43% male) express a need for more information, including specific risks and benefits to treatment. In general, both groups desired an active role in the acute stroke treatment decision. In contrast, the initial physician interviews indicated a hesitancy to provide NINDS data to patients and caregivers, skepticism of the existing data and cultural barriers to the use of rt-PA in AIS, the latter acquired through residency training or the opinions of their clinical colleagues. The interviewed clinicians, however, felt more positive about using rt-PA when a neurologist was readily available to support the decision. Conclusions: Preliminary findings suggest reluctance by emergency physicians to share data about the benefits of rt-PA to stroke patients and their caregivers, despite the desire of the latter for such information. While the additional planned interviews will be needed to confirm these findings, preliminary insights suggest a compelling need to overcome the reticence of emergency physicians to use clinical data to better engage patients in making a shared decision about rt-PA in AIS.