search
Back to results

Implementing a Decision Aid for Breast Cancer and DCIS Patients Deciding on Their Radiation Treatment. (BRASA)

Primary Purpose

Breast Cancer

Status
Completed
Phase
Not Applicable
Locations
Netherlands
Study Type
Interventional
Intervention
Decision Aid
Sponsored by
Maastricht University
About
Eligibility
Locations
Arms
Outcomes
Full info

About this trial

This is an interventional other trial for Breast Cancer

Eligibility Criteria

18 Years - undefined (Adult, Older Adult)FemaleDoes not accept healthy volunteers

Inclusion Criteria:

  • 18 years or older
  • Female
  • Doubtful indication of:

    • Whole breast irradiation after lumpectomy for DCIS
    • Whole breast irradiation after lumpectomy for low risk invasive BC (TOP-1 study)
    • Boost dose in case of Breast Conserving Therapy
    • Thoracic wall irradiation post mastectomy

Exclusion Criteria:

  • Metastasis
  • Inability to speak and read Dutch. Inability to use internet access, either in the home or at a hospital facility.

Sites / Locations

  • Radboud UMC
  • MAASTRO-clinic
  • Maastricht University
  • Academisch Medisch Centrum (AMC)
  • NKI-AVL

Arms of the Study

Arm 1

Arm 2

Arm Type

No Intervention

Experimental

Arm Label

control group/pre intervention

intervention arm

Arm Description

the first 164 patients will receive care as usual and will make the decision together with their clinician without support of the decision aid. They will be asked to fill out the questionnaires.

another 164 patients will receive the decision aid as support for the decision making process with their clinician.

Outcomes

Primary Outcome Measures

Decisional conflict
measured with on the decisional conflict scale. Measured by the decisional conflict scale ( O'Connor, 1995), This contains 16 questions answered on a 5 point likert scale( strongly agree-strongly disagree). Items are given a score value of 0-4. The total score is calculated by: summed, divided by 16 and multiplied by 25. scores range from 0 ( no decisional conflict to 100 (extreme high decisional conflict). The scale also consist of 5 subscales: uncertainty subscore, informed subscore, values subscore, support subscore and the effective decision subscore.

Secondary Outcome Measures

Improvement on the perceived level of shared decision making.
measured with the 9-item Shared Decision Making questionnaire (SDM-Q-9,( Kriston 2009)). This contains 9 questions answered on a 6 point likert scale, ranging from 0 ( completely disagree) to 5 ( completely agree). The total score is calculated by: summed score multiplied by 2.2222 transforming to a scale from 0 to 100.
Improvement on the perceived level of shared decision making.
measured with the collaboRATE questionnaire ( Barr 2014), This contains 3 questions answered on a 10 point anchored scale, ranging from 0 ( no effort was made) to 9 ( every effort was made). The total score is calculated by: summed score multiplied by 3.704 transforming to a scale from 0 ( no effort made) to 100 (every effort made).
Patient knowledge
measured with a ( self developed) knowledge test. This contains 11 questions with 3 possible answers ( True, not true and don't know). For every right answered question 1 point, wrong answers -1 and don't know 0 are given resulting in a range from -11 ( all answers wrong) to 11 ( all answers right).
Decisional conflict
measured with on the decisional conflict scale Measured by the decisional conflict scale ( O'Connor, 1995), This contains 16 questions answered on a 5 point likert scale( strongly agree-strongly disagree). Items are given a score value of 0-4. The total score is calculated by: summed, divided by 16 and multiplied by 25. scores range from 0 ( no decisional conflict to 100 (extreme high decisional conflict). The scale also consist of 5 subscales: uncertainty subscore, informed subscore, values subscore, support subscore and the effective decision subscore.
Prospective process evaluation
how many patients did effectively use the decision aid and how many consultations were needed for the decision to be made. Measured by a log system on the decision aid and by consulting the patients on how many consultations they hade before making the decision.

Full Information

First Posted
October 31, 2017
Last Updated
July 27, 2020
Sponsor
Maastricht University
search

1. Study Identification

Unique Protocol Identification Number
NCT03375801
Brief Title
Implementing a Decision Aid for Breast Cancer and DCIS Patients Deciding on Their Radiation Treatment.
Acronym
BRASA
Official Title
Implementing a Decision Aid for Breast Cancer and DCIS Patients Deciding on Their Radiation Treatment: A Pre- and Post-intervention Study.
Study Type
Interventional

2. Study Status

Record Verification Date
July 2020
Overall Recruitment Status
Completed
Study Start Date
October 1, 2017 (Actual)
Primary Completion Date
October 30, 2019 (Actual)
Study Completion Date
July 27, 2020 (Actual)

3. Sponsor/Collaborators

Responsible Party, by Official Title
Sponsor
Name of the Sponsor
Maastricht University

4. Oversight

Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Drug Product
No
Studies a U.S. FDA-regulated Device Product
No
Data Monitoring Committee
No

5. Study Description

Brief Summary
This is a pre-and post intervention study on the effect and implementation of an personalized decision aid for woman with breast cancer who face a decision on their radiation treatment.
Detailed Description
Rationale: Guidelines on breast cancer treatment show grey areas for some radiotherapy (RT) indications. In some recommendations the uncertainty is marked and deferred to sharing the final decision on the treatment of choice with the patient. Other recommendations are straightforward, but the multidisciplinary team may decide, based on the latest literature, that different options should be discussed with the patient. In these so called "preference sensitive decisions" there is not one best option. The best option depends on the individual patients' preferences based on neutral and complete information tailored to her own situation. Decision aids support clinicians as well as patients in Shared Decision Making (SDM). Decision aids reduce the patient's decisional conflict after making their decision, increase their knowledge on their illness and the treatment options, and their perceived level of involvement in the decision making process. Although extensive research has been carried out on the effect of decision aids in clinical trials, less is known of the effect of a decision aid in daily clinical practice. The implementation of SDM is challenged by many barriers. The investigators hypothesize that adapting the decision aid to individual patient characteristics may enhance both personalised medicine and SDM. Objective: To investigate whether SDM using a personalised decision aid, results in improved outcomes of decisional quality, measured by the Decisional Conflict Scale after 3 months and one year, and improved outcomes of the decisional process, measured with the SDMQ9 and collaboRATE directly after the last consultation, compared to the standard clinical practices in breast cancer patients facing a decision on their radiation treatment. Study design: This is a multicenter clustered , pre- and post-intervention study. Before the intervention 164 patients will be included. After introducing the decision aid, at the beginning of the intervention period, clinicians will be trained in using the decision aid and the other 164 patients will be recruited. Study population: Breast cancer patients facing a decision in their adjuvant radiation treatment. Intervention: The intervention group will receive the instructions and the online decision aid. Main study parameters/endpoints: Primary endpoint: Decisional conflict 3 months after the decision has been made. Secondary endpoint(s): The perceived level of shared decision making, patient knowledge, , and decisional conflict 1 year after decision has been made. A process evaluation will also be perform.

6. Conditions and Keywords

Primary Disease or Condition Being Studied in the Trial, or the Focus of the Study
Breast Cancer

7. Study Design

Primary Purpose
Other
Study Phase
Not Applicable
Interventional Study Model
Sequential Assignment
Model Description
Pre- and post intervention study.
Masking
None (Open Label)
Masking Description
first 164 patients will not receive the decision aid, they will only fill out the questionnaires. The next 164 patients will receive the decision aid and will be asked to fill out the same questionnaires.
Allocation
Non-Randomized
Enrollment
403 (Actual)

8. Arms, Groups, and Interventions

Arm Title
control group/pre intervention
Arm Type
No Intervention
Arm Description
the first 164 patients will receive care as usual and will make the decision together with their clinician without support of the decision aid. They will be asked to fill out the questionnaires.
Arm Title
intervention arm
Arm Type
Experimental
Arm Description
another 164 patients will receive the decision aid as support for the decision making process with their clinician.
Intervention Type
Other
Intervention Name(s)
Decision Aid
Intervention Description
This will be an online tool giving evidence based information and explanation on their options.
Primary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Decisional conflict
Description
measured with on the decisional conflict scale. Measured by the decisional conflict scale ( O'Connor, 1995), This contains 16 questions answered on a 5 point likert scale( strongly agree-strongly disagree). Items are given a score value of 0-4. The total score is calculated by: summed, divided by 16 and multiplied by 25. scores range from 0 ( no decisional conflict to 100 (extreme high decisional conflict). The scale also consist of 5 subscales: uncertainty subscore, informed subscore, values subscore, support subscore and the effective decision subscore.
Time Frame
90 days after the decision on their radiation treatment has been made
Secondary Outcome Measure Information:
Title
Improvement on the perceived level of shared decision making.
Description
measured with the 9-item Shared Decision Making questionnaire (SDM-Q-9,( Kriston 2009)). This contains 9 questions answered on a 6 point likert scale, ranging from 0 ( completely disagree) to 5 ( completely agree). The total score is calculated by: summed score multiplied by 2.2222 transforming to a scale from 0 to 100.
Time Frame
90 days after the decision on their radiation treatment has been made
Title
Improvement on the perceived level of shared decision making.
Description
measured with the collaboRATE questionnaire ( Barr 2014), This contains 3 questions answered on a 10 point anchored scale, ranging from 0 ( no effort was made) to 9 ( every effort was made). The total score is calculated by: summed score multiplied by 3.704 transforming to a scale from 0 ( no effort made) to 100 (every effort made).
Time Frame
90 days after the decision on their radiation treatment has been made
Title
Patient knowledge
Description
measured with a ( self developed) knowledge test. This contains 11 questions with 3 possible answers ( True, not true and don't know). For every right answered question 1 point, wrong answers -1 and don't know 0 are given resulting in a range from -11 ( all answers wrong) to 11 ( all answers right).
Time Frame
directly after the decision on adjuvant RT has been made (<3 days)
Title
Decisional conflict
Description
measured with on the decisional conflict scale Measured by the decisional conflict scale ( O'Connor, 1995), This contains 16 questions answered on a 5 point likert scale( strongly agree-strongly disagree). Items are given a score value of 0-4. The total score is calculated by: summed, divided by 16 and multiplied by 25. scores range from 0 ( no decisional conflict to 100 (extreme high decisional conflict). The scale also consist of 5 subscales: uncertainty subscore, informed subscore, values subscore, support subscore and the effective decision subscore.
Time Frame
365 days after the decision on adjuvant RT has been made
Title
Prospective process evaluation
Description
how many patients did effectively use the decision aid and how many consultations were needed for the decision to be made. Measured by a log system on the decision aid and by consulting the patients on how many consultations they hade before making the decision.
Time Frame
directly after the decision on adjuvant RT has been made (<3 days)

10. Eligibility

Sex
Female
Gender Based
Yes
Gender Eligibility Description
Female
Minimum Age & Unit of Time
18 Years
Accepts Healthy Volunteers
No
Eligibility Criteria
Inclusion Criteria: 18 years or older Female Doubtful indication of: Whole breast irradiation after lumpectomy for DCIS Whole breast irradiation after lumpectomy for low risk invasive BC (TOP-1 study) Boost dose in case of Breast Conserving Therapy Thoracic wall irradiation post mastectomy Exclusion Criteria: Metastasis Inability to speak and read Dutch. Inability to use internet access, either in the home or at a hospital facility.
Facility Information:
Facility Name
Radboud UMC
City
Nijmegen
State/Province
Gelderland
ZIP/Postal Code
6525 GA
Country
Netherlands
Facility Name
MAASTRO-clinic
City
Maastricht
State/Province
Limburg
ZIP/Postal Code
6229 ET
Country
Netherlands
Facility Name
Maastricht University
City
Maastricht
State/Province
Limburg
Country
Netherlands
Facility Name
Academisch Medisch Centrum (AMC)
City
Amsterdam
State/Province
Noord-Holland
ZIP/Postal Code
1105 AZ
Country
Netherlands
Facility Name
NKI-AVL
City
Amsterdam
State/Province
Noord-Holland
Country
Netherlands

12. IPD Sharing Statement

Plan to Share IPD
No
Citations:
PubMed Identifier
32298961
Citation
Raphael DB, Russell NS, Immink JM, Westhoff PG, Stenfert Kroese MC, Stam MR, van Maurik LM, van den Bongard HJGD, Maduro JH, Sattler MGA, van der Weijden T, Boersma LJ. Risk communication in a patient decision aid for radiotherapy in breast cancer: How to deal with uncertainty? Breast. 2020 Jun;51:105-113. doi: 10.1016/j.breast.2020.04.001. Epub 2020 Apr 6.
Results Reference
derived

Learn more about this trial

Implementing a Decision Aid for Breast Cancer and DCIS Patients Deciding on Their Radiation Treatment.

We'll reach out to this number within 24 hrs