Decision making and management of gliomas: practical considerations.

Over the last decade, diagnostic options and introduction of novel treatments have expanded the armamentarium in the management of malignant glioma. Combined chemoradiotherapy has become the standard of care in glioblastoma up to the age of 70 years, while treatment in elderly patients or with lower grade glioma is less well defined. Molecular markers define different disease subtypes and allow for adapted treatment selection. This review focuses on simple questions arising in the daily management of patients.

The impact of information on decision-making in palliative care

Résumé Ce travail vise à clarifier les résultats contradictoires de la littérature concernant les besoins des patients d'être informés et de participer à la prise de décision. La littérature insiste sur le contenu de l'information comme base de la prise de décision, bien qu'il existe des preuves que d'autres contenus sont importants pour les patients. La thèse essaie en outre d'identifier des possibilités de mieux répondre aux préférences d'information et de participation des patients. Les travaux ont porté en particulier sur les soins palliatifs. Une analyse de la littérature donne un aperçu sur les soins palliatifs, sur l'information des patients et sur leur participation à la prise de décisions thérapeutiques. Cette analyse résume les résultats d'études précédentes et propose un: modèle théorique d'information, de prise de décision et de relation entre ces deux domaines. Dans le cadre de ce travail, deux études empiriques ont utilisé des questionnaires écrits adressés à des personnes privées et à des professionnels de la santé, couvrant la Suisse et le Royaume Uni, pour identifier d'éventuelles différences entre ces deux pays. Les enquêtes ont été focalisées sur des patients souffrant de cancer du poumon. Les instruments utilisés pour ces études proviennent de la littérature afin de les rendre comparables. Le taux de réponse aux questionnaires était de 30-40%. La majorité des participants aux enquêtes estime que les patients devraient: - collaborer à la prise de décision quant à leur traitement - recevoir autant d'information que possible, positive aussi bien que négative - recevoir toutes les informations mentionnées dans le questionnaire (concernant la maladie, le diagnostic et les traitements), tenant compte de la diversité des priorités des patients - être soutenus par des professionnels de la santé, leur famille, leurs amis et/ou les personnes souffrant de la même maladie En plus, les participants aux enquêtes ont identifié divers contenus de l'information aux patients souffrant d'une maladie grave. Ces contenus comprennent entre autres: - L'aide à la prise de décision concernant le traitement - la possibilité de maintenir le contrôle de la situation - la construction d'une relation entre le patient et le soignant - l'encouragement à faire des projets d'avenir - l'influence de l'état émotionnel - l'aide à la compréhension de la maladie et de son impact - les sources potentielles d'états confusionnels et d'états anxieux La plupart des contenus proposés sont positifs. Les résultats suggèrent la coexistence possible de différents contenus à un moment donné ainsi que leur changement au cours du temps. Un modèle est ensuite développé et commenté pour présenter le diagnostic d'une maladie grave. Ce modèle est basé sur la littérature et intègre les résultats des études empiriques réalisées dans le cadre de ce travail. Ce travail analyse également les sources préférées d'information et de soutien, facteurs qui peuvent influencer ou faire obstacle aux préférences d'information et de participation. Les deux groupes de participants considèrent les médecins spécialistes comme la meilleure source d'information. En ce qui concerne le soutien, les points de vue divergent entre les personnes privées et les professionnels de la santé: généralement, les rôles de soutien semblent peu définis parmi les professionnels. Les barrières à l'information adéquate du patient apparaissent fréquemment liées aux caractéristiques des professionnels et aux problèmes d'organisation. Des progrès dans ce domaine contribueraient à améliorer les soins fournis aux patients. Finalement, les limites des études empiriques sont discutées. Celles-ci comprennent, entre autres, la représentativité restreinte des participants et les objections de certains groupes de participants à quelques détails des questionnaires. Summary The present thesis follows a call from the current body of literature to better understand patient needs for information and for participation in decision-making, as previous research findings had been contradictory. Information so far seems to have been considered essentially as a means to making treatment decisions, despite certain evidence that it may have a number of other values to patients. Furthermore, the thesis aims to identify ways to optimise meeting patient preferences for information and participation in treatment decisions. The current field of interest is palliative care. An extensive literature review depicts the background of current concepts of palliative care, patient information and patient involvement into treatment decisions. It also draws together results from previous studies and develops a theoretical model of information, decision-making, and the relationship between them. This is followed by two empirical studies collecting data from members of the general public and health care professionals by means of postal questionnaires. The professional study covers both Switzerland and the United Kingdom in order to identify possible differences between countries. Both studies focus on newly diagnosed lung cancer patients. The instruments used were taken from the literature to make them comparable. The response rate in both surveys was 30-40%, as expected -sufficient to allow stastical tests to be performed. A third study, addressed to lung cancer patients themselves, turned out to require too much time within the frame available. A majority of both study populations thought that patients should: - have a collaborative role in treatment-related decision-making -receive as much information as possible, good or bad - receive all types of information mentioned in the questionnaire (about illness, tests, and treatment), although priorities varied across the study populations - be supported by health professionals, family members, friends and/or others with the same illness Furthermore they identified various 'meanings' information may have to patients with a serious illness. These included: - being an aid in treatment-related decision-making - allowing control to be maintained over the situation - helping the patient-professional relationship to be constructed - allowing plans to be made - being positive for the patient's emotional state - helping the illness and its impact to be understood - being a source of anxiety - being a potential source of confusion to the patient Meanings were mostly positive. It was suggested that different meanings could co-exist at a given time and that they might change over time. A model of coping with the disclosure of a serious diagnosis is then developped. This model is based on existing models of coping with threatening events, as takeñ from the literature [ref. 77, 78], and integrates findings from the empirical studies. The thesis then analyses the remaining aspects apparent from the two surveys. These range from the identification of preferred information and support providers to factors influencing or impeding information and participation preferences. Specialist doctors were identified by both study populations as the best information providers whilst with regard to support provision views differed between the general public and health professionals. A need for better definition of supportive roles among health care workers seemed apparent. Barriers to information provision often seem related to health professional characteristics or organisational difficulties, and improvements in the latter field could well help optimising patient care. Finally, limitations of the studies are discussed, including questions of representativness of certain results and difficulties with or objections against questionnaire details by some groups of respondents.

Decision-making in lumbar spinal stenosis: A survey on the influence of the morphology of the dural sac.

Surgical decision-making in lumbar spinal stenosis involves assessment of clinical parameters and the severity of the radiological stenosis. We suspected that surgeons based surgical decisions more on dural sac cross-sectional area (DSCA) than on the morphology of the dural sac. We carried out a survey among members of three European spine societies. The axial T2-weighted MR images from ten patients with varying degrees of DSCA and morphological grades according to the recently described morphological classification of lumbar spinal stenosis, with DSCA values disclosed in half the assessed images, were used for evaluation. We provided a clinical scenario to accompany the images, which were shown to 142 responding physicians, mainly orthopaedic surgeons but also some neurosurgeons and others directly involved in treating patients with spinal disorders. As the primary outcome we used the number of respondents who would proceed to surgery for a given DSCA or morphological grade. Substantial agreement among the respondents was observed, with severe or extreme stenosis as defined by the morphological grade leading to surgery. This decision was not dependent on the number of years in practice, medical density or specialty. Disclosing the DSCA did not alter operative decision-making. In all, 40 respondents (29%) had prior knowledge of the morphological grading system, but their responses showed no difference from those who had not. This study suggests that the participants were less influenced by DSCA than by the morphological appearance of the dural sac. Classifying lumbar spinal stenosis according to morphology rather than surface measurements appears to be consistent with current clinical practice.

Effective continuing professional development for translating shared decision making in primary care: A study protocol.

Background: Shared decision making (SDM) is a process by which a healthcare choice is made jointly by the healthcare professional and the patient. SDM is the essential element of patient-centered care, a core concept of primary care. However, SDM is seldom translated into primary practice. Continuing professional development (CPD) is the principal means by which healthcare professionals continue to gain, improve, and broaden the knowledge and skills required for patient-centered care. Our international collaboration seeks to improve the knowledge base of CPD that targets translating SDM into the clinical practice of primary care in diverse healthcare systems. Methods: Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR), our project is to form an international, interdisciplinary research team composed of health services researchers, physicians, nurses, psychologists, dietitians, CPD decision makers and others who will study how CPD causes SDM to be practiced in primary care. We will perform an environmental scan to create an inventory of CPD programs and related activities for translating SDM into clinical practice. These programs will be critically assessed and compared according to their strengths and limitations. We will use the empirical data that results from the environmental scan and the critical appraisal to identify knowledge gaps and generate a research agenda during a two-day workshop to be held in Quebec City. We will ask CPD stakeholders to validate these knowledge gaps and the research agenda. Discussion: This project will analyse existing CPD programs and related activities for translating SDM into the practice of primary care. Because this international collaboration will develop and identify various factors influencing SDM, the project could shed new light on how SDM is implemented in primary care.

Decision-Making in Social Enterprises: Exploring the Link between Employee Participation and Organizational Commitment

This article studies the influence of the procedural justice resulting from participation in decision-making on employees' affective commitment in social enterprises. It also examines whether any potential link between participation and commitment is due to social exchange, as is the case with for-profit companies. The study is based on data from employees of French work integration social enterprises. The results confirm the positive relationship between procedural justice and affective commitment and the mediating role of perceived organizational support and leader-member exchanges. Managerial recommendations are then given to best maintain or increase employees' involvement in the decision-making processes of social enterprises.

Effect of Emotion and Personality on Deviation from Purely Rational Decision-Making

Human decision-making has consistently demonstrated deviation from "pure" rationality. Emotions are a primary driver of human actions and the current study investigates how perceived emotions and personality traits may affect decision-making during the Ultimatum Game (UG). We manipulated emotions by showing images with emotional connotation while participants decided how to split money with a second player. Event-related potentials (ERPs) from scalp electrodes were recorded during the whole decision-making process. We observed significant differences in the activity of central and frontal areas when participants offered money with respect to when they accepted or rejected an offer. We found that participants were more likely to offer a higher amount of money when making their decision in association with negative emotions. Furthermore, participants were more likely to accept offers when making their decision in association with positive emotions. Honest, conscientious, and introverted participants were more likely to accept offers. Our results suggest that factors others than a rational strategy may predict economic decision-making in the UG.

Patients' preferences on information and involvement in decision making for gastrointestinal surgery.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between physicians and patients has undergone important changes, and the current emancipation of patients has led to a real partnership in medical decision making. The present study aimed to assess patients' preferences on different aspects of decision making during treatment and potential complications, as well as the amount and type of preoperative information wanted before visceral surgery. METHODS: This was a prospective non-randomized study based on a questionnaire given to 253 consecutive patients scheduled for elective gastrointestinal surgery. RESULTS: In considering surgical complications or treatment in the intensive care unit, 64 % of patients wished to take an active role in any medical decisions. The respective figures for cardiac resuscitation and treatment limitations were 89 and 60 %. As for information, 73, 77, and 47 % of patients wish detailed information, information on a potential ICU hospitalization, and knowledge of cardiac resuscitation, respectively. Elderly and low-educated patients were significantly less interested in shared medical decision making (p = 0.003 and 0.015), and in receiving information (p = 0.03 and 0.05). Similarly, involvement of the family in decision making was significantly less important to elderly and male patients (p = 0.05 and 0.03, respectively). Neither the type of operation (minor or major) nor the severity of disease (malignancies versus non-malignancies) was a significant factor for shared decision making, information, or family involvement. CONCLUSIONS: The vast majority of surgical patients clearly want to get adequate preoperative information about their disease and the planned treatment. They also consider it crucial to be involved in any kind of decision making for treatment and complications. For most patients, the family role is limited to supporting the treating physicians if the patient is unable to participate in decision making.

Surrogate decision making for patients with end-stage dementia.

OBJECTIVE: We aim to explore how health surrogates of patients with dementia proceed in decision making, which considerations are decisive, and whether family surrogates and professional guardians decide differently. METHODS: We conducted an experimental vignette study using think aloud protocol analysis. Thirty-two family surrogates and professional guardians were asked to decide on two hypothetical case vignettes, concerning a feeding tube placement and a cardiac pacemaker implantation in patients with end-stage dementia. They had to verbalize their thoughts while deciding. Verbalizations were audio-recorded, transcribed, and analyzed according to content analysis. By experimentally changing variables in the vignettes, the impact of these variables on the outcome of decision making was calculated. RESULTS: Although only 25% and 31% of the relatives gave their consent to the feeding tube and pacemaker placement, respectively, 56% and 81% of the professional guardians consented to these life-sustaining measures. Relatives decided intuitively, referred to their own preferences, and focused on the patient's age, state of wellbeing, and suffering. Professional guardians showed a deliberative approach, relied on medical and legal authorities, and emphasized patient autonomy. Situational variables such as the patient's current behavior and the views of health care professionals and family members had higher impacts on decisions than the patient's prior statements or life attitudes. CONCLUSIONS: Both the process and outcome of surrogate decision making depend heavily on whether the surrogate is a relative or not. These findings have implications for the physician-surrogate relationship and legal frameworks regarding surrogacy. Copyright © 2011 John Wiley & Sons, Ltd.