Development and acceptability testing of a patient decision aid for individuals with localized renal masses considering surgical removal with partial or radical nephrectomy.
Clicks: 390
ID: 50339
2019
Article Quality & Performance Metrics
Overall Quality
Not rated
Combines reader engagement with the AI quality analysis. This
article has not been analysed, so there is no overall score —
reader engagement is measured and shown alongside.
Reader Engagement
Steady Performance
71.9
/100
390 views
264 readers
Trending
AI Quality Assessment
Not analyzed
Readership in this journal
SteadyRanked #1 of 4 articles by views in urologic oncology
Most read
Least read
Bar heights use a square-root scale.
Mint this article as an NFT
Not yet mintedCreate a permanent, verifiable on-chain record of this article on the Scimatic Network. The NFT is held in your Journament account, and you can withdraw it to your own wallet at any time.
5
SUSD
one-off · no wallet required
Abstract
Patient decision aids are structured clinical tools that facilitate shared decision-making. In urology, the decision between partial and radical nephrectomy for a renal mass can be difficult. We sought to develop and evaluate a decision aid for patients with a localized renal mass considering surgery. This paper describes the development process and acceptability testing of our patient decision aid.A decision aid was systematically created using the International Patient Decision Aids Standards. Review of the literature identified evidence regarding patient-important outcomes of partial and radical nephrectomy. A mixed methods survey was designed to assess acceptability of the decision aid. Kidney cancer survivors, patient advocates, methodological experts, and urologists were recruited to evaluate the decision aid. The primary outcome was the acceptability of the decision aid reported by survey responders.An evidence-based decision aid was created. Included benefits were overall survival, cancer-free survival, and length of hospital stay. Included harms were postoperative bleeding, urine leak, stage 3 renal failure, renal replacement therapy, and flank bulge. The decision aid met the International Patient Decision Aids Standards defining (6 of 6), certification (6 of 6), and quality criteria (21 of 23). Results of acceptability testing were highly favorable. Responders (n = 22) reported the decision aid had acceptable language (91%), an appropriate length (82%), and presented balanced options (91%). Nine of 11 urologists (82%) reported intended use with future patients.A novel, evidence-based decision aid was created for patients with renal masses considering surgery. The decision aid is available at https://decisionaid.ohri.ca/AZsumm.php?ID=1913. A separate decision aid addressing the management of small renal masses is currently under development.
| Reference Key |
mcalpine2019developmenturologic
Use this key to autocite in the manuscript while using
SciMatic Manuscript Manager or Thesis Manager
|
|---|---|
| Authors | McAlpine, Kristen;Breau, Rodney H;Stacey, Dawn;Knee, Christopher;Jewett, Michael A S;Cagiannos, Ilias;Morash, Christopher;Lavallée, Luke T; |
| Journal | urologic oncology |
| Year | 2019 |
| DOI |
S1078-1439(19)30332-1
|
| URL | |
| Keywords |
Citations
No citations found. To add a citation, contact the admin at info@scimatic.org
Comments
No comments yet. Be the first to comment on this article.