Skip to main content
eScholarship
Open Access Publications from the University of California

UC Davis

UC Davis Previously Published Works bannerUC Davis

Decision aid use during post-biopsy consultations for localized prostate cancer.

  • Author(s): Holmes-Rovner, Margaret
  • Srikanth, Akshay
  • Henry, Stephen G
  • Langford, Aisha
  • Rovner, David R
  • Fagerlin, Angela
  • et al.

Published Web Location

https://doi.org/10.1111/hex.12613
Abstract

Background

Decision Aids (DAs) effectively translate medical evidence for patients but are not routinely used in clinical practice. Little is known about how DAs are used during patient-clinician encounters.

Objective

To characterize the content and communicative function of high-quality DAs during diagnostic clinic visits for prostate cancer.

Participants

252 men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who had received a DA, 45 treating physicians at 4 US Veterans Administration urology clinics.

Methods

Qualitative analysis of transcribed audio recordings was used to inductively develop categories capturing content and function of all direct references to DAs (booklet talk). The presence or absence of any booklet talk per transcript was also calculated.

Results

Booklet talk occurred in 55% of transcripts. Content focused on surgical procedures (36%); treatment choice (22%); and clarifying risk classification (17%). The most common function of booklet talk was patient corroboration of physicians' explanations (42%), followed by either physician or patient acknowledgement that the patient had the booklet. Codes reflected the absence of DA use for shared decision-making. In regression analysis, predictors of booklet talk were fewer years of patient education (P = .027) and more time in the encounter (P = .027). Patient race, DA type, time reading the DA, physician informing quality and physician age did not predict booklet talk.

Conclusions

Results show that good decision aids, systematically provided to patients, appeared to function not to open up deliberations about how to balance benefits and harms of competing treatments, but rather to allow patients to ask narrow technical questions about recommended treatments.

Many UC-authored scholarly publications are freely available on this site because of the UC's open access policies. Let us know how this access is important for you.

Main Content
Current View