Randomized Controlled Trial of a Computerized Decision Aid on Adjuvant Radioactive Iodine Treatment for Patients With Early-Stage Papillary Thyroid Cancer

2012 ◽  
Vol 30 (23) ◽  
pp. 2906-2911 ◽  
Author(s):  
Anna M. Sawka ◽  
Sharon Straus ◽  
Lorne Rotstein ◽  
James D. Brierley ◽  
Richard W. Tsang ◽  
...  

Purpose Decision-making on adjuvant radioactive iodine (RAI) treatment for early-stage papillary thyroid cancer (PTC) is complex because of uncertainties in medical evidence. Using a parallel, two-arm, randomized, controlled trial design, we examined the impact of a patient-directed computerized decision aid (DA) on the medical knowledge and decisional conflict in patients with early-stage PTC considering the choice of being treated with adjuvant RAI or not. The DA describes the rationale, possible risks and benefits, and the medical evidence uncertainty relating to the choice. Patients and Methods We recruited 74 patients with early-stage PTC after thyroidectomy. Participants were assigned by using 1:1 central computerized randomization to either the DA group with usual care (intervention) or usual care alone (control). Medical knowledge about PTC and RAI treatment (the primary outcome), as well as decisional conflict (a secondary outcome), were measured by using validated questionnaires, and the respective scores were compared between groups. Results Consistent with PTC epidemiology, 83.8% (62 of 74) of the participants were women, and the mean age was 45.8 years (range, 19 to 79 years). Medical knowledge about PTC and RAI treatment was significantly greater and decisional conflict was significantly reduced in the DA group compared with the control group (respective P values < .001). The use of adjuvant RAI treatment was not significantly different between groups (DA group, 11 of 37 [29.7%]; controls, seven of 37 [18.9%]; P = .278). Conclusion A computerized DA improves informed decision making in patients with early-stage PTC who are considering adjuvant RAI treatment. DAs are useful for patients facing decisions subject to medical evidence uncertainty.

2020 ◽  
Vol 38 (15_suppl) ◽  
pp. 7033-7033
Author(s):  
Shalaka P Joshi ◽  
Lakshmi Ramarajan ◽  
Ojas Deshpande ◽  
Elizabeth Fernandes ◽  
Vaibhav Vanmali ◽  
...  

7033 Background: Shared decision making to confront choices with clinical equipoise, has been the privilege of those patients with access to time intensive consults with oncologists. We conducted a randomized controlled trial for breast cancer patients to use an online, self-administered, out-of-the-medical-encounter decision aid (DA) to choose between breast conserving surgery (BCS) and mastectomy. Methods: Navya Patient Preference Tool (Navya PPT) is a multilingual DA based on adaptive conjoint analysis of tradeoffs between cost, adverse effects of radiation, and breast conservation. Prior analysis established high internal reliability and external validity of the Navya PPT. Eligible cT1/2, cN0 breast cancer patients planned for surgery were block randomized, in 1:1:1 ratio, to receive the research questionnaire (RQ) to measure decisional conflict on choice of surgery (control, arm 1), Navya PPT followed by RQ (experimental, arm 2) or Navya PPT followed by RQ administered with key male family member (experimental, arm 3). Groups were stratified with respect to age, socio-economic status (SES) and educational level. The study was powered to detect a decrease in Decisional Conflict Index (DCI) by 0.25 (β-0.8, two sided α- 0.01). Results: Between June 2017 and December 2019, 247/255 patients were randomized to arm 1 (83), arm 2 (84), and arm 3 (80). Median age was 48 years (IQR 23-76), and median pT size was .5 cm (0.5-6 cm). 59% of patients were middle or lower SES and 46.2% had ≤ 12th grade education. DCI was significantly reduced in arm 2 as compared with arm 1 (1.34 vs. 1.65, Cohen’s d 0.49 (± 0.31) p<0.05) as well as in arm 3 as compared with arm 1 (1.30 vs. 1.65, Cohen’s d 0.54 (± 0.31) p<0.05). 80% (± 6%) of patients underwent surgery of choice as determined by Navya PPT. BCS rate was similar in all three arms (85.2, 88.9 and 86.5% respectively (p=0.779). Conclusions: Online, self-administered, adaptive DAs used out of the medical encounter can reduce decisional conflict and increase access to shared decision making for every patient; especially in practices with low doctor to patient ratios. Clinical trial information: IEC/0116/1619/001 .


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document