Expanding the reach of decision and communication aids in a breast care center: a quality improvement study.

University of California, San Francisco, USA.
Patient Education and Counseling (Impact Factor: 2.6). 05/2011; 83(2):234-9. DOI: 10.1016/j.pec.2010.07.003
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT One academically based breast cancer clinic implements decision and communication aids as part of routine clinical care. This quality improvement study aimed to expand reach of these supportive materials and services with budget-neutral program changes.
We used program theory and continuous quality improvement to design changes to our program. We calculated reach as the number of new patient visits for which we administered decision and communication aids. We compared reach before and after the program changes.
Program changes included: reassigning program outreach tasks from over-committed to under-utilized personnel; deploying personnel in floating rather than fixed schedules; and creating a waitlist so service delivery was dynamically reallocated from overbooked to underbooked personnel. Before these changes, we reached 208 visitors with decision aids, and 142 visitors with communication aids. Changes were associated with expanded reach, culminating in program year 2008 with the delivery of 936 decision aids and 285 communication aids.
We observed over a fourfold increase in decision aid reach and a twofold increase in communication aid reach. We attribute increases to recent program changes.
This study illustrates how program theory and quality improvement methods can contribute to expanded reach of decision and communication aids.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background:The way in which patients receive bad news in a consultation can have a profound effect in terms of anxiety, depression and subsequent adjustment. Despite investment in well-researched communication skills training and availability of decision-making aids, communication problems in oncology continue to be encountered.Methods:We conducted a mixed-methods study in a large UK Cancer Centre to develop a novel consultation aid that could be used jointly by patients and doctors. Consultations were audio-recorded and both the doctors and the patients were interviewed. We used conversation analysis to analyse the consultation encounter and interpretative phenomenological analysis to analyse the interviews. Key themes were generated to inform the design of the aid.Results:A total of 16 doctors were recruited into the study along with 77 patients. Detailed analysis from 36 consultations identified key themes (including preparation, information exchange, question-asking and decision making), which were subsequently addressed in the design of the paper-based aid.Conclusions:Using detailed analysis and observation of oncology consultations, we have designed a novel consultation aid that can be used jointly by doctors and patients. It is not tumour-site specific and can potentially be utilised by new and follow-up consultations.British Journal of Cancer advance online publication, 18 February 2014; doi:10.1038/bjc.2013.749
    British Journal of Cancer 02/2014; · 5.08 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We operate a decision support program in a medical center in San Francisco. In this program, postbaccalaureate, premedical interns deliver decision and communication, aids to patients. We asked whether working in this program helped these premedical interns develop key physician competencies. To measure physician competencies, we adopted the standards of the Accreditation Committee on Graduate Medical Education (ACGME), which accredits residency programs in the USA. The ACGME competencies are patient care, medical knowledge, practice-based learning, interpersonal and communication skills, professionalism, and systems-based practice. We developed a survey for our program alumni to rate themselves on a scale from 0 (none) to 100 (perfect) on each competency, before and after their time in our program. The survey also solicited free-text comments regarding each competency. In June 2012, we e-mailed all 47 alumni a link to our online survey and then analyzed responses received by July 15, 2012. We visually explored the distributions of ratings and compared medians. We selected the most specific and concrete comments from the qualitative responses. Respondents (21/47 or 45 %) reported that their participation in Decision Services increased their competencies across the board. Qualitative comments suggest that this is because students accompanied patients on their clinic journeys (seeing multiple facets of the systems of care) while also actively facilitating patient physician communication. Providing decision support can improve self-ratings of crucial physician competencies. Educators should consider deploying premedical and medical students as decision support coaches to increase competencies through experiential learning.
    Journal of Cancer Education 10/2013; · 0.88 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Background Men with prostate cancer face preference-sensitive decisions when choosing among treatments with similar survival outcomes but different procedures, risks and potential complications. A decision-support intervention, ‘Decision Navigation’ assists men with prostate cancer to prepare a question list (consultation plan) for their doctors and provides them with a consultation summary and audio recording. A randomised controlled trial of Decision Navigation showed advantages over usual care on quantitative measures including confidence in decision-making and regret. Objective The aim of this study was to gain a qualitative understanding of patient's and doctor's perspectives on Decision Navigation. Methods Six patients who received Decision Navigation were purposively selected for interview out of 62 randomised controlled trial participants. All four doctors who consulted Navigated patients were interviewed. Interview data was analysed using framework analysis. Results Patients reported that planning for the consultation helped them to frame their questions, enabling them to participate in consultations and take responsibility for making decisions. They reported feeling more confident in the decisions made, having a written report of the key information and an audio recording. Patients considered routine information relating to side effects was inadequate. Doctors reported that consultation plans made them aware of patients' concerns and ensured comprehensive responses to questions posed. Doctors also endorsed implementing Decision Navigation as part of routine care. Conclusion Results suggest that Decision Navigation facilitated patients' involvement in treatment decision-making. Prostate patients engaging in preference-sensitive decision-making welcomed this approach to personalised tailored support. Copyright © 2014 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.
    Psycho-Oncology 02/2014; · 3.51 Impact Factor