IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/patien/v11y2018i1d10.1007_s40271-017-0268-2.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Serious Choices: A Protocol for an Environmental Scan of Patient Decision Aids for Seriously Ill People at Risk of Death Facing Choices about Life-Sustaining Treatments

Author

Listed:
  • Catherine H. Saunders

    (The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice)

  • Glyn Elwyn

    (The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice)

  • Kathryn Kirkland

    (The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice
    Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center
    Geisel School of Medicine)

  • Marie-Anne Durand

    (The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice)

Abstract

Background Seriously ill people at high risk of death face difficult decisions, especially concerning the extent of medical intervention. Given the inherent difficulty and complexity of these decisions, the care they receive often does not align with their preferences. Patient decision aids that educate individuals about options and help them construct preferences about life-sustaining care may reduce the mismatch between the care people say they want and the care they receive. The quantity and quality of patient decision aids for those at high risk of death, however, are unknown. Objective This protocol describes an approach for conducting an environmental scan of life-sustaining treatment patient decision aids for seriously ill patients, identified online and through informant analysis. We intend for the outcome to be an inventory of all life-sustaining treatment patient decision aids for seriously ill patients currently available (either publicly or proprietarily) along with information about their content, quality, and known use. Methods We will identify patient decision aids in a three-step approach (1) mining previously published systematic reviews; (2) systematically searching online and in two popular app stores; and (3) undertaking a key informant survey. We will screen and assess the quality of each patient decision aid identified using the latest published draft of the U.S. National Quality Forum National Standards for the Certification of Patient Decision Aids. Additionally, we will evaluate readability via readable.io and content via inductive content analysis. We will also use natural language processing to assess the content of the decision aids. Discussion Researchers increasingly recognize the environmental scan as an optimal method for studying real-world interventions, such as patient decision aids. This study will advance our understanding of the availability, quality, and use of decision aids for life-sustaining interventions targeted at seriously ill patients. We also aim to provide patients, their families, and friends, along with their clinicians, a broad set of resources for making life-sustaining treatment decisions. Although we intend to capture all patient decision aids for the seriously ill in our review, we anticipate the possibility that we may miss some decision aids. In addition to publishing our findings in an academic journal, we plan to post our inventory online in an easy-to-read format for public and clinical consumption.

Suggested Citation

  • Catherine H. Saunders & Glyn Elwyn & Kathryn Kirkland & Marie-Anne Durand, 2018. "Serious Choices: A Protocol for an Environmental Scan of Patient Decision Aids for Seriously Ill People at Risk of Death Facing Choices about Life-Sustaining Treatments," The Patient: Patient-Centered Outcomes Research, Springer;International Academy of Health Preference Research, vol. 11(1), pages 97-106, February.
  • Handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:11:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s40271-017-0268-2
    DOI: 10.1007/s40271-017-0268-2
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://link.springer.com/10.1007/s40271-017-0268-2
    File Function: Abstract
    Download Restriction: Access to the full text of the articles in this series is restricted.

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s40271-017-0268-2?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:patien:v:11:y:2018:i:1:d:10.1007_s40271-017-0268-2. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.