Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review

Maes‐Carballo, Marta; Muñoz‐Núñez, Isabel; Martín-Díaz, Manuel; Mignini, Luciano; Bueno‐Cavanillas, Aurora; Khan, Khalid S.

doi:10.1111/hex.13112

Cited by 33 publications

(42 citation statements)

References 87 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…However, when therapeutic options may lead to different results depending on patients’ preferences, patients’ participation in the decision-making process is a keystone of high-quality cancer care. Shared Decision-Making (SDM) can be defined as “an approach where physicians and patients share the best available evidence when faced with the task of making treatment decisions, and where patients are supported to consider options, to achieve informed preferences [ 54 ], with positive effects on patient satisfaction cost effectiveness and the number of malpractice lawsuits” [ 55 , 56 , 57 ] (Maes-Carballo et al, 2020) [ 58 ].…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success Factors and Barriers in Combining Personalized Medicine and Patient Centered Care in Breast Cancer. Results from a Systematic Review and Proposal of Conceptual Framework

Belvis

Pellegrino

Castagna

et al. 2021

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Breast Cancer (BC) is the leading cause of death due to cancer in women. Ensuring equitable, quality-assured and effective care has increased the complexity of BC management. This systematic review reports on the state-of-the art of available literature investigating the enactment of personalized treatment and patient-centered care models in BC clinical practice, building a framework for the delivery of personalized BC care within a Patient-Centered model. Databases were searched for articles (from the inception to December 2020) reporting on Patient-Centered or Personalized Medicine BC management models, assessing success factors or limits. Out of 1885 records, 25 studies were included in our analysis. The main success factors include clearly defined roles and responsibilities within a multi-professional collaboration, appropriate training programs and adequate communication strategies and adopting a universal genomic language to improve patients’ involvement in the decision-making process. Among detected barriers, delays in the use of genetic testing were linked to the lack of public reimbursement schemes and of clear indications in timing and appropriateness. Overall, both care approaches are complementary and necessary to effectively improve BC patient management. Our framework attempts to bridge the gap in assigning a central role played by shared decision-making, still scarcely investigated in literature.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Success Factors and Barriers in Combining Personalized Medicine and Patient Centered Care in Breast Cancer. Results from a Systematic Review and Proposal of Conceptual Framework

Belvis

Pellegrino

Castagna

et al. 2021

JPM

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This important aspect, should be considered when developing the guidelines (87,88). Therefore, to better develop the guidelines and improve the prognosis of patients with breast cancer, guideline developers should also pay particular attention to patients' values and preferences, as well as the costs and resource implications when formulating the recommendations (89). Even though AGREE II has been used in previous studies regarding quality evaluation of guidelines, it is widely accepted as the evaluation standard of the methodological quality of guidelines and may not the optimal tool for evaluation of the reporting quality.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A quality evaluation of the clinical practice guidelines on breast cancer using the RIGHT checklist

Zhou¹,

Chen²,

Cheng³

et al. 2021

Ann Transl Med

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Breast cancer is the most frequent type of cancer in women. The methodological quality of clinical practice guidelines (CPGs) on breast cancer has been shown to be heterogeneous. The aim of our study was to evaluate the quality of breast cancer CPGs published in years 2018-2020, using the Reporting Items for Practice Guidelines in Healthcare (RIGHT) checklist.Methods: We searched Medline (via PubMed), Chinese National Knowledge Infrastructure (CNKI), Wanfang and Chinese Biomedical Literature (CBM) as well as websites of guideline organizations for CPGs on breast cancer published between 2018 and 2020. We used the RIGHT checklist to evaluate the reporting quality of the included guidelines by assessing whether the CPGs adhered to each item of the checklist and calculated the proportions of appropriately reported RIGHT checklist items. We also presented the adherence reporting rates for each guideline and the mean rates for each of the seven domains of the RIGHT checklist.Results: A total of 45 guidelines were included. Eighteen (40.0%) guidelines had an overall reporting rate below 50% and only three (6.7%) reported more than 80% of the items. The domains "Basic information" and "Background" had the highest reporting rates (75.9% and 62.5%, respectively). The mean reporting rates of the domains "Evidence", "Recommendation", "Review and quality assurance", "Funding and declaration and management of interests" and "Other information" were 42.7%, 53.0%, 33.3%, 45.0%, and 44.4%, respectively. Conclusions:The reporting quality varied among guidelines for breast cancer, showing the need for improvement in reporting the contents. Guideline developers should pay more attention to reporting the evidence, review and quality assurance, and funding and declaration and management of interests in future.

show abstract

“…A questionnaire was designed by a group of three SDM experts and breast cancer specialist (MMC, MD, LM) with a comprehensive theoretical and practical experience about this deliberative [ 24 , 25 ]. A literature review about SDM was done to elaborate and design a questionnaire to be self-completed online ( Appendix A ), which included brief information on the study’s scope and objectives and a warning to those members of several of these societies not to answer it in duplicate.…”

Section: Methodsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Evaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Survey

Maes‐Carballo

Martín-Díaz²,

Mignini³

et al. 2021

IJERPH

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives: To assess shared decision-making (SDM) knowledge, attitude and application among health professionals involved in breast cancer (BC) treatment. Materials and Methods: A cross-sectional study based on an online questionnaire, sent by several professional societies to health professionals involved in BC management. There were 26 questions which combined demographic and professional data with some items measured on a Likert-type scale. Results: The participation (459/541; 84.84%) and completion (443/459; 96.51%) rates were high. Participants strongly agreed or agreed in 69.57% (16/23) of their responses. The majority stated that they knew of SDM (mean 4.43 (4.36–4.55)) and were in favour of its implementation (mean 4.58 (4.51–4.64)). They highlighted that SDM practice was not adequate due to lack of resources (3.46 (3.37–3.55)) and agreed on policies that improved its implementation (3.96 (3.88–4.04)). The main advantage of SDM for participants was patient satisfaction (38%), and the main disadvantage was the patients’ paucity of knowledge to understand their disease (24%). The main obstacle indicated was the lack of time and resources (40%). Conclusions: New policies must be designed for adequate training of professionals in integrating SDM in clinical practice, preparing them to use SDM with adequate resources and time provided.

show abstract

Shared decision making in breast cancer treatment guidelines: Development of a quality assessment tool and a systematic review

Cited by 33 publications

References 87 publications

Success Factors and Barriers in Combining Personalized Medicine and Patient Centered Care in Breast Cancer. Results from a Systematic Review and Proposal of Conceptual Framework

Success Factors and Barriers in Combining Personalized Medicine and Patient Centered Care in Breast Cancer. Results from a Systematic Review and Proposal of Conceptual Framework

A quality evaluation of the clinical practice guidelines on breast cancer using the RIGHT checklist

Evaluation of the Use of Shared Decision Making in Breast Cancer: International Survey

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About