A prospective cohort study of shared decision making in lung cancer diagnostics: Impact of using a patient decision aid

Patient Educ Couns. 2019 Nov;102(11):1961-1968. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2019.05.018. Epub 2019 May 16.


Objective: The objective of this study was to describe the impact on patient-reported outcomes of introducing Shared Decision Making (SDM) and a Patient Decision Aid (PtDA) in the initial process of lung cancer diagnostics.

Methods: We conducted a prospective cohort study, where a control cohort was consulted according to usual clinical practice. After introducing SDM through a PtDA and training of the staff, the SDM cohort was enrolled in the study. All patients completed four questionnaires: the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) before and after the consultation, the CollaboRATE scale after the consultation, and the Decision Regret Scale (DRS).

Results: Patients exposed to SDM and a PtDA had significantly improved DCS scores after the consultation compared to the control group (a difference of 10.26, p = 0.0128) and significantly lower DRS scores (a difference of 8.98, p = 0.0197). Of the 82 control patients and 52 SDM patients 29% and 54%, respectively, gave the maximum score on the CollaboRATE scale (Pearson's chi2 8.0946, p = 0.004).

Conclusion: The use of SDM and a PtDA had significant positive impact on patient-reported outcomes.

Practice implications: Our results may encourage the increased uptake of SDM in the initial process of lung cancer diagnostics.

Keywords: CollaboRATE; Decisional conflict; Decisional regret; Lung cancer diagnostics; Patient decision aid; Shared decision making.

Publication types

  • Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't

MeSH terms

  • Decision Making, Shared*
  • Decision Support Techniques*
  • Denmark
  • Female
  • Humans
  • Lung Neoplasms / diagnosis*
  • Male
  • Middle Aged
  • Patient Reported Outcome Measures
  • Prospective Studies
  • Surveys and Questionnaires