Skip to main content
Clinical Trials/NCT03375801
NCT03375801
Completed
Not Applicable

Implementing a Decision Aid for Breast Cancer and DCIS Patients Deciding on Their Radiation Treatment: A Pre- and Post-intervention Study.

Maastricht University5 sites in 1 country403 target enrollmentOctober 1, 2017
ConditionsBreast Cancer

Overview

Phase
Not Applicable
Intervention
Not specified
Conditions
Breast Cancer
Sponsor
Maastricht University
Enrollment
403
Locations
5
Primary Endpoint
Decisional conflict
Status
Completed
Last Updated
5 years ago

Overview

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.

Registry
clinicaltrials.gov
Start Date
October 1, 2017
End Date
July 27, 2020
Last Updated
5 years ago
Study Type
Interventional
Study Design
Sequential
Sex
Female

Investigators

Responsible Party
Sponsor

Eligibility Criteria

Inclusion Criteria

  • 18 years or older
  • 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.

Outcomes

Primary Outcomes

Decisional conflict

Time Frame: 90 days after the decision on their radiation treatment has been made

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 Outcomes

  • Decisional conflict(365 days after the decision on adjuvant RT has been made)
  • Improvement on the perceived level of shared decision making.(90 days after the decision on their radiation treatment has been made)
  • Patient knowledge(directly after the decision on adjuvant RT has been made (<3 days))
  • Prospective process evaluation(directly after the decision on adjuvant RT has been made (<3 days))

Study Sites (5)

Loading locations...

Similar Trials