Patient perceptions of balance in prostate cancer screening decision aids

Purpose. Recent reports reveals that studies of decision aids reported concern about the balance and accuracy of information included in decision aids. This study explores measures of balance in patient decision aids through a review of prostate cancer screening decision aid studies and analysis of patients’ rating of a patient decision aid for prostate cancer screening. ^ Methods. A data-abstraction form was used to collect the key characteristics, pertaining to balance, of studies included in the review. The key characteristics included (1) sample characteristics (age, race, family history of prostate cancer, and education), (2) description of the decision aid and how it was implemented, and (3) if a measure of balance was used for process evaluation and the rating. A summary table was used to report the findings. Deidentified data was received from a decision aid control trial and logistic regression analysis was used to test the association between the dependent variable (balance) and the independent variables (age, family history, race, screening preference at baseline, education, health insurance status). ^ Conclusion. Three sociodemographic variables remained significant in the final regression model: African American race, education and PSA history. Further research is needed to determine if these variables can predict a man’s perception of balance in prostate cancer screening decision aids. If a patient’s perceptions of balance can be predicted based on specific characteristics, patient report may not be the most objective method of evaluating the acceptability of a decision.^

Affect and cognition measures in preference-based decisions: Validity testing of the Ottawa Decisional Conflict Scale and a decision-specific anxiety measure with men eligible for prostate cancer screening

Background. At present, prostate cancer screening (PCS) guidelines require a discussion of risks, benefits, alternatives, and personal values, making decision aids an important tool to help convey information and to help clarify values. Objective: The overall goal of this study is to provide evidence of the reliability and validity of a PCS anxiety measure and the Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS). Methods. Using data from a randomized, controlled PCS decision aid trial that measured PCS anxiety at baseline and DCS at baseline (T0) and at two-weeks (T2), four psychometric properties were assessed: (1) internal consistency reliability, indicated by factor analysis intraclass correlations and Cronbach's α; (2) construct validity, indicated by patterns of Pearson correlations among subscales; (3) discriminant validity, indicated by the measure's ability to discriminate between undecided men and those with a definite screening intention; and (4) factor validity and invariance using confirmatory factor analyses (CFA). Results. The PCS anxiety measure had adequate internal consistency reliability and good construct and discriminant validity. CFAs indicated that the 3-factor model did not have adequate fit. CFAs for a general PCS anxiety measure and a PSA anxiety measure indicated adequate fit. The general PCS anxiety measure was invariant across clinics. The DCS had adequate internal consistency reliability except for the support subscale and had adequate discriminate validity. Good construct validity was found at the private clinic, but was only found for the feeling informed subscale at the public clinic. The traditional DCS did not have adequate fit at T0 or at T2. The alternative DCS had adequate fit at T0 but was not identified at T2. Factor loadings indicated that two subscales, feeling informed and feeling clear about values, were not distinct factors. Conclusions. Our general PCS anxiety measure can be used in PCS decision aid studies. The alternative DCS may be appropriate for men eligible for PCS. Implications: More emphasis needs to be placed on the development of PCS anxiety items relating to testing procedures. We recommend that the two DCS versions be validated in other samples of men eligible for PCS and in other health care decisions that involve uncertainty. ^

A qualitative assessment of multi-level nutrition strategies for reducing racial and ethnic disparities in diabetes

The purpose of this study is to examine the stages of program realization of the interventions that the Bronx Health REACH program initiated at various levels to improve nutrition as a means for reducing racial and ethnic disparities in diabetes. This study was based on secondary analyses of qualitative data collected through the Bronx Health REACH Nutrition Project, a project conducted under the auspices of the Institute on Urban Family Health, with support from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). Local human subjects' review and approval through the Institute on Urban Family Health was required and obtained in order to conduct the Bronx Health REACH Nutrition Project. ^ The study drew from two theoretical models—Glanz and colleagues' nutrition environments model and Shediac-Rizkallah and Bone's sustainability model. The specific study objectives were two-fold: (1) to categorize each nutrition activity to a specific dimension (i.e. consumer, organizational or community nutrition environment); and (2) to evaluate the stage at which the program has been realized (i.e. development, implementation or sustainability). ^ A case study approach was applied and a constant comparative method was used to analyze the data. Triangulation of data based was also conducted. Qualitative data from this study revealed the following principal findings: (1) communities of color are disproportionately experiencing numerous individual and environmental factors contributing to the disparities in diabetes; (2) multi-level strategies that targeted the individual, organizational and community nutrition environments can appropriately address these contributing factors; (3) the nutrition strategies greatly varied in their ability to appropriately meet criteria for the three program stages; and (4) those nutrition strategies most likely to succeed (a) conveyed consistent and culturally relevant messages, (b) had continued involvement from program staff and partners, (c) were able to adapt over time or setting, (d) had a program champion and a training component, (e) were integrated into partnering organizations, and (f) were perceived to be successful by program staff and partners in their efforts to create individual, organizational and community/policy change. As a result of the criteria-based assessment and qualitative findings, an ecological framework elaborating on Glanz and colleagues model was developed. The qualitative findings and the resulting ecological framework developed from this study will help public health professionals and community leaders to develop and implement sustainable multi-level nutrition strategies for addressing racial and ethnic disparities in diabetes. ^

Environmental sustainability and the human element: Decision making in National Cancer Institute-designated cancer centers and Practice Greenhealth subscribing institutions

Background. Various aspects of sustainability have taken root in the hospital environment; however, decisions to pursue sustainable practices within the framework of a master plan are not fully developed in National Cancer Institute (NCI) -designated cancer centers and subscribing institutions to the Practice Greenhealth (PGH) listserv.^ Methods. This cross sectional study was designed to identify the organizational characteristics each study group pursed to implement sustainability practices, describe the barriers they encountered and reasons behind their choices for undertaking certain sustainability practices. A web-based questionnaire was pilot tested, and then sent out to 64 NCI-designated cancer centers and 1638 subscribing institutions to the PGH listserv.^ Results. Complete responses were received from 39 NCI-designated cancer centers and 58 subscribing institutions to the PGH listserv. NCI-designated cancer centers reported greater progress in integrating sustainability criteria into design and construction projects than hospitals of institutions subscribing to the PHG listserv (p-value = <0.05). Statistically significant differences were also identified between these two study groups in undertaking work life options, conducting energy usage assessments, developing energy conservation and optimization plans, implementing solid waste and hazardous waste minimization programs, using energy efficient vehicles and reporting sustainability progress to external stakeholders. NCI-designated cancer centers were further along in implementing these programs (p-value = <0.05). In comparing the self-identified NCI-designated cancer centers to centers that indicated they were both and NCI and PGH, the later had made greater progress in using their collective buying power to pursue sustainable purchasing practices within the medical community (p-value = <0.05). In both study groups, recycling programs were well developed.^ Conclusions. Employee involvement was viewed as the most important reason for both study groups to pursue recycling initiatives and incorporated environmental criteria into purchasing decisions. A written sustainability commitment did not readily translate into a high percentage that had developed a sustainability master plan. Coordination of sustainability programs through a designated sustainability professional was not being undertaken by a large number of institutions within each study group. This may be due to the current economic downturn or management's attention to the emerging health care legislation being debated in congress. ^ Lifecycle assessments, an element of a carbon footprint, are seen as emerging areas of opportunity for health care institutions that can be used to evaluate the total lifecycle costs of products and services.^

A review of economic analysis in the vaccination program; decision making and governance: Adivisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP)

The Advisory Committee on Immunization Practices (ACIP) develops written recommendations for the routine administration of vaccines to children and adults in the U.S. civilian population. The ACIP is the only entity in the federal government that makes such recommendations. ACIP elaborates on selection of its members and rules out concerns regarding its integrity, but fails to provide information about the importance of economic analysis in vaccine selection. ACIP recommendations can have large health and economic consequences. Emphasis on economic evaluation in health is a likely response to severe pressures of the federal and state health budget. This study describes the economic aspects considered by the ACIP while sanctioning a vaccine, and reviews the economic evaluations (our economic data) provided for vaccine deliberations. A five year study period from 2004 to 2009 is adopted. Publicly available data from ACIP web database is used. Drummond et al. (2005) checklist serves as a guide to assess the quality of economic evaluations presented. Drummond et al.'s checklist is a comprehensive hence it is unrealistic to expect every ACIP deliberation to meet all of their criteria. For practical purposes we have selected seven criteria that we judge to be significant criteria provided by Drummond et al. Twenty-four data points were obtained in a five year period. Our results show that out of the total twenty-four data point‘s (economic evaluations) only five data points received a score of six; that is six items on the list of seven were met. None of the data points received a perfect score of seven. Seven of the twenty-four data points received a score of five. A minimum of a two score was received by only one of the economic analyses. The type of economic evaluation along with the model criteria and ICER/QALY criteria met at 0.875 (87.5%). These three criteria were met at the highest rate among the seven criteria studied. Our study findings demonstrate that the perspective criteria met at 0.583 (58.3%) followed by source and sensitivity analysis criteria both tied at 0.541 (54.1%). The discount factor was met at 0.250 (25.0%).^ Economic analysis is not a novel concept to the ACIP. It has been practiced and presented at these meetings on a regular basis for more than five years. ACIP‘s stated goal is to utilize good quality epidemiologic, clinical and economic analyses to help policy makers choose among alternatives presented and thus achieve a better informed decision. As seen in our study the economic analyses over the years are inconsistent. The large variability coupled with lack of a standardized format may compromise the utility of the economic information for decision-making. While making recommendations, the ACIP takes into account all available information about a vaccine. Thus it is vital that standardized high quality economic information is provided at the ACIP meetings. Our study may provide a call for the ACIP to further investigate deficiencies within the system and thereby to improve economic evaluation data presented. ^