Improving Decision Role Concordance in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Patients
Primary Purpose
Breast Cancer
Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Patient Preference in Treatment Decision Making
Sponsored by

About this trial
This is an interventional other trial for Breast Cancer focused on measuring early stage breast cancer;, treatment decision making, newly diagnosed breast cancer
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
- All patients who present to Huntsman Cancer Hospital/University of Utah for a newly diagnosed breast cancer surgical consultation.
Exclusion Criteria:
- Men with breast cancer.
- Patients who have previously seen another medical provider to discuss treatment for newly diagnosed breast cancer.
Sites / Locations
Arms of the Study
Arm 1
Arm 2
Arm Type
No Intervention
Experimental
Arm Label
The non-intervention control group
The intervention group
Arm Description
In the non-intervention control group, providers are blind to the patient's preferred decision making role.
The provider will be informed of the patient preference in treatment decision making (preferred role) and have a discussion about this with the patient in the intervention group.
Outcomes
Primary Outcome Measures
Decision role concordance before and after a surgical consultation
The primary outcome measures the changes from patient's preferred role in baseline (before a surgical consultation) to the perception of whether the patient achieved the preferred role (immediately after a surgical consultation) in the surgical consultation.
Decision role concordance of provider and patient
It measures the difference in the patient's perception of the achieved role and provider's perception of the patient's preferred role.
Secondary Outcome Measures
Patient's satisfaction with the decision making process
Satisfaction with the decision making process will be measured directly after the clinic encounter using a modified version of the Holmes-Rovner Satisfaction with Decision scale. The scale uses a Likert-type ranking of 6 items related to decision making, with 1 being strongly disagree and 5 being strongly agree.
Comparing Reliability and Validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) assessment of short-term quality of life between the groups
Quality of life will be assessed using the (FACT-B) questionnaire. FACT-B measures 27 items in five different areas: physical well-being, social/family well-being, emotional well-being, functional well-being, and additional concerns specific to this patient population. FACT-B is measured on the scale from 0 to 4, with a total minimum score of 0 and maximum score of 144.
The Decision Regret outcome
The decision regret outcome will be measured using the Decision Regret Scale. The Decision Regret Scale is is a 5 item scale with items ranked on a 5-point Likert-type scale and added together with higher score indicating more regret.
Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making (OPTION) assessment of patient involvement
The outcome of patient involvement at the clinic encounter will be measured using the OPTION scale. This scale measures 12 item from 0 to 4, with 0 being "this behavior is not observed" to 4 "This behavior is exhibited to a very high standard"
completion or intention to complete therapies
Group differences in completion or intention to complete recommended therapies will be assessed at 6 months after the clinic visit through chart review of all participants' charts.
Full Information
1. Study Identification
Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03350854
Brief Title
Improving Decision Role Concordance in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Patients
Official Title
An Intervention to Improve Decision Role Concordance Amongst Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Patients
Study Type
Interventional
2. Study Status
Record Verification Date
November 2017
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
March 7, 2016 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
January 31, 2017 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
August 9, 2017 (Actual)
3. Sponsor/Collaborators
Responsible Party, by Official Title
Principal Investigator
Name of the Sponsor
University of Utah
4. Oversight
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
Yes
5. Study Description
Brief Summary
The goal of this project is to test the effects of the Patient Preference Scale as the basis for a clinical intervention for role negotiation in breast cancer surgery decisions and the Patient Perception Scale to measure role concordance. The investigators hypothesize that better role concordance will be achieved with a simple provider-based intervention. In the first half of the study, providers will be blind to the patient's preferred role. In the second half, providers will be made aware of the preferred role prior to the encounter and will have a brief conversation with the patient about their desired role in the decision making process.
Detailed Description
The goal of this project is to test the effects of the Patient Preference Scale as the basis for a clinical intervention for role negotiation in breast cancer surgery decisions and the Patient Perception Scale to measure role concordance. The investigators hypothesize that better role concordance will be achieved with a simple provider-based intervention. In addition, role concordance will be associated with improved short-term and longer-term improvements in outcomes of the following parameters: a) satisfaction with decision process b) breast specific QOL, and c) decision regret.
The investigators propose a mixed methods, interventional study with concurrent controls performed in a breast cancer surgery clinic at a comprehensive cancer center. The Patient Preference Scale will be used to identify the preferred involvement in decision making of newly diagnosed breast cancer patients prior to their first clinic visit. The Patient Perception Scale will be used after the encounter in order to evaluate role concordance. The Provider Perception Scale will also be used to assess the perception of the achieved role by the provider. In the first half of the study, providers will be blind to the patient's preferred role. In the second half, providers will be made aware of the preferred role prior to the encounter and will have a brief conversation with the patient about their desired role in the decision making process. Clinical encounters will be audiotaped, transcribed, and scored for patient involvement. The investigators propose the following aims and hypotheses:
Investigate the impact of a brief provider-led intervention about the patients' preferred role in treatment decision making on role concordance. The investigators hypothesize that:
1. Role concordance will be improved when the preferred role is discussed with the patient at the beginning of the encounter.
2. The provider's perception of the role achieved will be more concordant with the patient's perception when the preferred role is discussed. 3. Investigate the impact of role concordance in the treatment decision making process on short term and long term quality of life and decision outcomes. The investigators hypothesize that: Patients who achieve role concordance will be more satisfied with the decision process.
Patients who achieve role concordance will have better QOL and less decision regret at early (2 to 6 weeks) and later (6 months) time points after the clinic visit.
Patients who achieve concordance will be more likely to complete or plan to complete recommended treatments.
Patients who achieve concordance will be more likely to complete or plan to complete recommended treatments
6. Conditions and Keywords
Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Breast Cancer
Keywords
early stage breast cancer;, treatment decision making, newly diagnosed breast cancer
7. Study Design
Primary Purpose
Other
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Parallel Assignment
Masking
Participant
Allocation
Randomized
Enrollment
100 (Actual)
8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions
Arm Title
The non-intervention control group
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
In the non-intervention control group, providers are blind to the patient's preferred decision making role.
Arm Title
The intervention group
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
The provider will be informed of the patient preference in treatment decision making (preferred role) and have a discussion about this with the patient in the intervention group.
Intervention Type
Behavioral
Intervention Name(s)
Patient Preference in Treatment Decision Making
Intervention Description
The roles are divided into two active roles, a collaborative (or shared) role, and two passive roles in the Patient Preference scale questionnaire. Once the questionnaire is administered, the patient will then proceed to original surgical appointment. The provider is informed of the patient's preferred role and has a discussion with them patient about this in the intervention group, but not in the control group.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Decision role concordance before and after a surgical consultation
Description
The primary outcome measures the changes from patient's preferred role in baseline (before a surgical consultation) to the perception of whether the patient achieved the preferred role (immediately after a surgical consultation) in the surgical consultation.
Time Frame
The estimated period is 3 hours (before and immediately after a surgical consultation)
Title
Decision role concordance of provider and patient
Description
It measures the difference in the patient's perception of the achieved role and provider's perception of the patient's preferred role.
Time Frame
This is an one-time measurement (Immediately after a surgical consultation)
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Patient's satisfaction with the decision making process
Description
Satisfaction with the decision making process will be measured directly after the clinic encounter using a modified version of the Holmes-Rovner Satisfaction with Decision scale. The scale uses a Likert-type ranking of 6 items related to decision making, with 1 being strongly disagree and 5 being strongly agree.
Time Frame
immediately after a surgical consultation
Title
Comparing Reliability and Validity of the Functional Assessment of Cancer Therapy-Breast (FACT-B) assessment of short-term quality of life between the groups
Description
Quality of life will be assessed using the (FACT-B) questionnaire. FACT-B measures 27 items in five different areas: physical well-being, social/family well-being, emotional well-being, functional well-being, and additional concerns specific to this patient population. FACT-B is measured on the scale from 0 to 4, with a total minimum score of 0 and maximum score of 144.
Time Frame
This scale will be used prior to the first consultation to establish a baseline for each patient and will subsequently be used at 2 weeks and 6 months after initial clinic visit.
Title
The Decision Regret outcome
Description
The decision regret outcome will be measured using the Decision Regret Scale. The Decision Regret Scale is is a 5 item scale with items ranked on a 5-point Likert-type scale and added together with higher score indicating more regret.
Time Frame
The scale will be administered at 2 weeks and 6 months after initial clinic visit.
Title
Observing Patient Involvement in Decision Making (OPTION) assessment of patient involvement
Description
The outcome of patient involvement at the clinic encounter will be measured using the OPTION scale. This scale measures 12 item from 0 to 4, with 0 being "this behavior is not observed" to 4 "This behavior is exhibited to a very high standard"
Time Frame
4 months after initial clinic visit
Title
completion or intention to complete therapies
Description
Group differences in completion or intention to complete recommended therapies will be assessed at 6 months after the clinic visit through chart review of all participants' charts.
Time Frame
6 months after initial clinic visit
10. Eligibility
Sex
Female
Gender Based
Yes
Gender Eligibility Description
Eligibility is based on gender (female breast cancer patients)
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria:
All patients who present to Huntsman Cancer Hospital/University of Utah for a newly diagnosed breast cancer surgical consultation.
Exclusion Criteria:
Men with breast cancer.
Patients who have previously seen another medical provider to discuss treatment for newly diagnosed breast cancer.
Overall Study Officials:
First Name & Middle Initial & Last Name & Degree
Cindy Matsen, MD
Organizational Affiliation
University of Utah
Official's Role
Principal Investigator
12. IPD Sharing Statement
Plan to Share IPD
Undecided
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
19570647
Citation
Sepucha K, Ozanne EM. How to define and measure concordance between patients' preferences and medical treatments: A systematic review of approaches and recommendations for standardization. Patient Educ Couns. 2010 Jan;78(1):12-23. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2009.05.011. Epub 2009 Jun 30.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19957353
Citation
Sepucha KR, Barry MJ. Making patient-centered cancer care a reality. Cancer. 2009 Dec 15;115(24):5610-1. doi: 10.1002/cncr.24824. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23235595
Citation
Dwamena F, Holmes-Rovner M, Gaulden CM, Jorgenson S, Sadigh G, Sikorskii A, Lewin S, Smith RC, Coffey J, Olomu A. Interventions for providers to promote a patient-centred approach in clinical consultations. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2012 Dec 12;12(12):CD003267. doi: 10.1002/14651858.CD003267.pub2.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
26215573
Citation
Stiggelbout AM, Pieterse AH, De Haes JC. Shared decision making: Concepts, evidence, and practice. Patient Educ Couns. 2015 Oct;98(10):1172-9. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2015.06.022. Epub 2015 Jul 15.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23229908
Citation
Livaudais JC, Franco R, Fei K, Bickell NA. Breast cancer treatment decision-making: are we asking too much of patients? J Gen Intern Med. 2013 May;28(5):630-6. doi: 10.1007/s11606-012-2274-3. Epub 2012 Nov 15.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16110013
Citation
Katz SJ, Lantz PM, Janz NK, Fagerlin A, Schwartz K, Liu L, Deapen D, Salem B, Lakhani I, Morrow M. Patient involvement in surgery treatment decisions for breast cancer. J Clin Oncol. 2005 Aug 20;23(24):5526-33. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2005.06.217.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
21474265
Citation
Chewning B, Bylund CL, Shah B, Arora NK, Gueguen JA, Makoul G. Patient preferences for shared decisions: a systematic review. Patient Educ Couns. 2012 Jan;86(1):9-18. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2011.02.004. Epub 2011 Apr 6.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20873956
Citation
Singh JA, Sloan JA, Atherton PJ, Smith T, Hack TF, Huschka MM, Rummans TA, Clark MM, Diekmann B, Degner LF. Preferred roles in treatment decision making among patients with cancer: a pooled analysis of studies using the Control Preferences Scale. Am J Manag Care. 2010 Sep;16(9):688-96.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22999786
Citation
Frongillo M, Feibelmann S, Belkora J, Lee C, Sepucha K. Is there shared decision making when the provider makes a recommendation? Patient Educ Couns. 2013 Jan;90(1):69-73. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2012.08.016. Epub 2012 Sep 20.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9505581
Citation
Degner LF, Sloan JA, Venkatesh P. The Control Preferences Scale. Can J Nurs Res. 1997 Fall;29(3):21-43.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
9145723
Citation
Degner LF, Kristjanson LJ, Bowman D, Sloan JA, Carriere KC, O'Neil J, Bilodeau B, Watson P, Mueller B. Information needs and decisional preferences in women with breast cancer. JAMA. 1997 May 14;277(18):1485-92.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15284259
Citation
Janz NK, Wren PA, Copeland LA, Lowery JC, Goldfarb SL, Wilkins EG. Patient-physician concordance: preferences, perceptions, and factors influencing the breast cancer surgical decision. J Clin Oncol. 2004 Aug 1;22(15):3091-8. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2004.09.069.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19940010
Citation
Tariman JD, Berry DL, Cochrane B, Doorenbos A, Schepp K. Preferred and actual participation roles during health care decision making in persons with cancer: a systematic review. Ann Oncol. 2010 Jun;21(6):1145-1151. doi: 10.1093/annonc/mdp534. Epub 2009 Nov 25.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
8944063
Citation
Johnson JD, Roberts CS, Cox CE, Reintgen DS, Levine JS, Parsons M. Breast cancer patients' personality style, age, and treatment decision making. J Surg Oncol. 1996 Nov;63(3):183-6. doi: 10.1002/(SICI)1096-9098(199611)63:33.0.CO;2-9.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
20623805
Citation
Almyroudi A, Degner LF, Paika V, Pavlidis N, Hyphantis T. Decision-making preferences and information needs among Greek breast cancer patients. Psychooncology. 2011 Aug;20(8):871-9. doi: 10.1002/pon.1798. Epub 2010 Jul 11.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
12880217
Citation
Budden LM, Pierce PF, Hayes BA, Buettner PG. Australian women's prediagnostic decision-making styles, relating to treatment choices for early breast cancer treatment. Res Theory Nurs Pract. 2003 Summer;17(2):117-36. doi: 10.1891/rtnp.17.2.117.53178.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
18191933
Citation
Vogel BA, Bengel J, Helmes AW. Information and decision making: patients' needs and experiences in the course of breast cancer treatment. Patient Educ Couns. 2008 Apr;71(1):79-85. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.11.023. Epub 2008 Jan 8.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17534866
Citation
Vogel BA, Helmes AW, Hasenburg A. Concordance between patients' desired and actual decision-making roles in breast cancer care. Psychooncology. 2008 Feb;17(2):182-9. doi: 10.1002/pon.1215.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11041108
Citation
Wallberg B, Michelson H, Nystedt M, Bolund C, Degner LF, Wilking N. Information needs and preferences for participation in treatment decisions among Swedish breast cancer patients. Acta Oncol. 2000;39(4):467-76. doi: 10.1080/028418600750013375.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15960689
Citation
Lantz PM, Janz NK, Fagerlin A, Schwartz K, Liu L, Lakhani I, Salem B, Katz SJ. Satisfaction with surgery outcomes and the decision process in a population-based sample of women with breast cancer. Health Serv Res. 2005 Jun;40(3):745-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1475-6773.2005.00383.x.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19557823
Citation
Hack TF, Pickles T, Ruether JD, Weir L, Bultz BD, Mackey J, Degner LF. Predictors of distress and quality of life in patients undergoing cancer therapy: impact of treatment type and decisional role. Psychooncology. 2010 Jun;19(6):606-16. doi: 10.1002/pon.1590.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
15669023
Citation
Hack TF, Degner LF, Watson P, Sinha L. Do patients benefit from participating in medical decision making? Longitudinal follow-up of women with breast cancer. Psychooncology. 2006 Jan;15(1):9-19. doi: 10.1002/pon.907.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23712915
Citation
Hyphantis T, Almyroudi A, Paika V, Degner LF, Carvalho AF, Pavlidis N. Anxiety, depression and defense mechanisms associated with treatment decisional preferences and quality of life in non-metastatic breast cancer: a 1-year prospective study. Psychooncology. 2013 Nov;22(11):2470-7. doi: 10.1002/pon.3308. Epub 2013 May 27.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23054105
Citation
Hawley ST, Lillie SE, Morris A, Graff JJ, Hamilton A, Katz SJ. Surgeon-level variation in patients' appraisals of their breast cancer treatment experiences. Ann Surg Oncol. 2013 Jan;20(1):7-14. doi: 10.1245/s10434-012-2582-1. Epub 2012 Oct 6.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11352412
Citation
Gattellari M, Butow PN, Tattersall MH. Sharing decisions in cancer care. Soc Sci Med. 2001 Jun;52(12):1865-78. doi: 10.1016/s0277-9536(00)00303-8.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
11896094
Citation
Keating NL, Guadagnoli E, Landrum MB, Borbas C, Weeks JC. Treatment decision making in early-stage breast cancer: should surgeons match patients' desired level of involvement? J Clin Oncol. 2002 Mar 15;20(6):1473-9. doi: 10.1200/JCO.2002.20.6.1473.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23107518
Citation
Hillyer GC, Hershman DL, Kushi LH, Lamerato L, Ambrosone CB, Bovbjerg DH, Mandelblatt JS, Rana S, Neugut AI. A survey of breast cancer physicians regarding patient involvement in breast cancer treatment decisions. Breast. 2013 Aug;22(4):548-54. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2012.10.001. Epub 2012 Oct 27.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
24325874
Citation
Nguyen F, Moumjid N, Charles C, Gafni A, Whelan T, Carrere MO. Treatment decision-making in the medical encounter: comparing the attitudes of French surgeons and their patients in breast cancer care. Patient Educ Couns. 2014 Feb;94(2):230-7. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2013.07.011. Epub 2013 Dec 8.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16859860
Citation
de Haes H. Dilemmas in patient centeredness and shared decision making: a case for vulnerability. Patient Educ Couns. 2006 Sep;62(3):291-8. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.06.012. Epub 2006 Jul 21. No abstract available.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
23962230
Citation
Sivell S, Elwyn G, Edwards A, Manstead AS; BresDex group. Factors influencing the surgery intentions and choices of women with early breast cancer: the predictive utility of an extended theory of planned behaviour. BMC Med Inform Decis Mak. 2013 Aug 20;13:92. doi: 10.1186/1472-6947-13-92.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
16860523
Citation
Fagerlin A, Lakhani I, Lantz PM, Janz NK, Morrow M, Schwartz K, Deapen D, Salem B, Liu L, Katz SJ. An informed decision? Breast cancer patients and their knowledge about treatment. Patient Educ Couns. 2006 Dec;64(1-3):303-12. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2006.03.010. Epub 2006 Jul 24.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
17889495
Citation
O'Leary KA, Estabrooks CA, Olson K, Cumming C. Information acquisition for women facing surgical treatment for breast cancer: influencing factors and selected outcomes. Patient Educ Couns. 2007 Dec;69(1-3):5-19. doi: 10.1016/j.pec.2007.08.002. Epub 2007 Sep 24.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22070416
Citation
Singer E, Couper MP, Fagerlin A, Fowler FJ, Levin CA, Ubel PA, Van Hoewyk J, Zikmund-Fisher BJ. The role of perceived benefits and costs in patients' medical decisions. Health Expect. 2014 Feb;17(1):4-14. doi: 10.1111/j.1369-7625.2011.00739.x. Epub 2011 Nov 10.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
19001081
Citation
Sepucha K, Mulley AG Jr. A perspective on the patient's role in treatment decisions. Med Care Res Rev. 2009 Feb;66(1 Suppl):53S-74S. doi: 10.1177/1077558708325511. Epub 2008 Nov 10.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
22458618
Citation
Street RL Jr, Elwyn G, Epstein RM. Patient preferences and healthcare outcomes: an ecological perspective. Expert Rev Pharmacoecon Outcomes Res. 2012 Apr;12(2):167-80. doi: 10.1586/erp.12.3.
Results Reference
background
PubMed Identifier
32495282
Citation
Gutnik L, Allen CM, Presson AP, Matsen CB. Breast Cancer Surgery Decision Role Perceptions and Choice of Surgery. Ann Surg Oncol. 2020 Oct;27(10):3623-3632. doi: 10.1245/s10434-020-08485-8. Epub 2020 Jun 3.
Results Reference
derived
Links:
URL
http://archive.ahrq.gov/qual/nhqr05/nhqr05.htm
Description
AHRQ. National Healthcare Quality Report. 2005 [cited 2015 August 13]
Learn more about this trial
Improving Decision Role Concordance in Newly Diagnosed Breast Cancer Patients
We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs