共 50 条
A novel decision aid for acute myeloid leukemia: a feasibility and preliminary efficacy trial
被引:10
|作者:
Hildenbrand, Jordan D.
[1
]
Davis, Debra M.
[2
]
El-Jawahri, Areej
[3
]
Herring, Kris W.
[2
]
Locke, Susan C.
[2
]
Pollak, Kathryn I.
[4
]
Samsa, Gregory P.
[5
]
Steinhauser, Karen E.
[4
]
Troy, Jesse D.
[2
]
Ubel, Peter A.
[6
]
Leblanc, Thomas W.
[2
,7
]
机构:
[1] Duke Univ, Sch Med, Durham, NC USA
[2] Duke Univ, Duke Canc Inst, Durham, NC 27708 USA
[3] Massachusetts Gen Hosp, Boston, MA 02114 USA
[4] Duke Univ, Dept Populat Hlth Sci, Durham, NC USA
[5] Duke Univ, Dept Biostat & Bioinformat, Durham, NC USA
[6] Duke Univ, Sanford Sch Publ Policy, Durham, NC USA
[7] Duke Univ, Sch Med, Dept Med, Div Hematol Malignancies & Cellular Therapy, Durham, NC 27706 USA
关键词:
Acute myeloid leukemia;
AML;
Shared decision-making;
Prognostic understanding;
Decision aid;
QUALITY-OF-LIFE;
TRAUMATIC STRESS;
ADULT LITERACY;
RAPID ESTIMATE;
SCALE;
VALIDATION;
ASSOCIATIONS;
NUMERACY;
ILLNESS;
D O I:
10.1007/s00520-020-05864-5
中图分类号:
R73 [肿瘤学];
学科分类号:
100214 ;
摘要:
Purpose Acute myeloid leukemia (AML) is a hematologic malignancy characterized by a poor prognosis but also a paradoxical possibility of cure. This renders decision-making complex and imminent. Unfortunately, many patients with AML misestimate their prognosis and treatment risk. While decision aids can improve illness understanding and reduce decisional conflict, there are no validated decision aids for AML. We developed and tested a novel AML decision aid (NCT03442452). Methods Patients (n = 20) were recruited at Duke University from May 2018 to February 2019. Participants completed assessments of AML knowledge and decisional conflict, before and after using the electronic decision aid. The primary endpoint was feasibility (endpoint met if > 80% of study participants completed all study components). Secondary analyses of efficacy were conducted using paired t tests for dependent pre-/post-samples. Results The primary endpoint of feasibility was met (100% of participants completed all study components). Secondary analyses showed improved knowledge and reduced decisional conflict after using the decision aid. Knowledge scores improved from a mean of 11.8 (out of 18) correct items at baseline to 15.1 correct items after using the decision aid (mean difference 3.35; p < 0.0001). Decisional conflict scores reduced significantly from baseline to post-test as well (mean difference - 6.5; p = 0.02). Conclusion These findings suggest that our AML decision aid is a useful tool to improve the patient experience and promote shared decision-making in AML. A randomized efficacy trial is planned.
引用
收藏
页码:3563 / 3569
页数:7
相关论文