Patients' and physicians' beliefs and attitudes towards integrating personalized risk estimates into patient education about left ventricular assist device therapy
- PMID: 38290171
- DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2024.108157
Patients' and physicians' beliefs and attitudes towards integrating personalized risk estimates into patient education about left ventricular assist device therapy
Abstract
Background: Personalized risk (PR) estimates may enhance clinical decision making and risk communication by providing individualized estimates of patient outcomes. We explored stakeholder attitudes toward the utility, acceptability, usefulness and best-practices for integrating PR estimates into patient education and decision making about Left Ventricular Assist Device (LVAD).
Methods and results: As part of a 5-year multi-institutional AHRQ project, we conducted 40 interviews with stakeholders (physicians, nurse coordinators, patients, and caregivers), analyzed using Thematic Content Analysis. All stakeholder groups voiced positive views towards integrating PR in decision making. Patients, caregivers and coordinators emphasized that PR can help to better understand a patient's condition and risks, prepare mentally and logistically for likely outcomes, and meaningfully engage in decision making. Physicians felt it can improve their decision making by enhancing insight into outcomes, enhance tailored pre-emptive care, increase confidence in decisions, and reduce bias and subjectivity. All stakeholder groups also raised concerns about accuracy, representativeness and relevance of algorithms; predictive uncertainty; utility in relation to physician's expertise; potential negative reactions among patients; and overreliance.
Conclusion: Stakeholders are optimistic about integrating PR into clinical decision making, but acceptability depends on prospectively demonstrating accuracy, relevance and evidence that benefits of PR outweigh potential negative impacts on decision making quality.
Keywords: Clinical decision making; Patient engagement; Personalized risk estimates; Shared decision making.
Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Conflict of interest statement
Declaration of Competing Interest Thank you for your time and consideration. This article has not been published previously and is not under consideration elsewhere. There are no conflicts of interests to report. All authors agree with the content of the manuscript.
Similar articles
-
Impact of personalized risk scores on shared decision making in left ventricular assist device implantation: Findings from a qualitative study.Patient Educ Couns. 2024 Sep 11;130:108418. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2024.108418. Online ahead of print. Patient Educ Couns. 2024. PMID: 39288559
-
Caregivers of Patients Considering a Destination Therapy Left Ventricular Assist Device and a Shared Decision-Making Intervention: The DECIDE-LVAD Trial.JACC Heart Fail. 2018 Nov;6(11):904-913. doi: 10.1016/j.jchf.2018.06.019. Epub 2018 Oct 10. JACC Heart Fail. 2018. PMID: 30316931 Clinical Trial.
-
Assessment of patients' and caregivers' informational and decisional needs for left ventricular assist device placement: Implications for informed consent and shared decision-making.J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015 Sep;34(9):1182-9. doi: 10.1016/j.healun.2015.03.026. Epub 2015 Mar 31. J Heart Lung Transplant. 2015. PMID: 26087668 Free PMC article.
-
Does a Decision Aid Help Patients Learn about Their Treatment Options for Advanced Heart Failure? [Internet].Washington (DC): Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI); 2019 Apr. Washington (DC): Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI); 2019 Apr. PMID: 38117917 Free Books & Documents. Review.
-
Patients' and physicians' perceptions and attitudes about oral anticoagulation and atrial fibrillation: a qualitative systematic review.BMC Fam Pract. 2017 Jan 13;18(1):3. doi: 10.1186/s12875-016-0574-0. BMC Fam Pract. 2017. PMID: 28086887 Free PMC article. Review.
MeSH terms
Grants and funding
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Research Materials
