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.
Copyright © 2019 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.