TY - JOUR
T1 - The implementation of a decision aid for women with early-stage breast cancer considering contralateral prophylactic mastectomy
T2 - A pilot study
AU - Jansen, J.
AU - Serafimovska, A.
AU - Glassey, R.
AU - Zdenkowski, N.
AU - Saunders, C.
AU - Porter, D.
AU - Butow, P.
PY - 2022/1
Y1 - 2022/1
N2 - Objective: Despite little survival benefit and potential for harm, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rates are increasing amongst early-stage breast cancer patients at low contralateral breast cancer risk. We developed a CPM decision aid (DA) and conducted a pilot implementation. Methods: Surgeons and oncologists recruited eligible patients considering CPM. Consenting patients received the DA, completed a questionnaire and participated in a semi-structured interview. Clinicians were interviewed at study close. Results: Eleven clinicians and 31 patients participated. Three themes emerged: perceived utility and impact of the DA, disagreement regarding timing of delivery and target population, and implementation strategies. Both women and clinicians found the DA valuable, indicating it confirmed rather than changed preferences. Women (all of whom raised CPM themselves), preferred offering the DA early in treatment discussions whilst clinicians favoured targeting women who enquired about CPM. Conclusion: A DA about CPM is feasible and acceptable, but questions remain about the role of DAs in these types of decisions where one option has limited medical benefit. Practice implications: Some women have a high need to make an informed choice about CPM. Tools to support this could include a DA with a clear recommendation against CPM and an explanation why.
AB - Objective: Despite little survival benefit and potential for harm, contralateral prophylactic mastectomy (CPM) rates are increasing amongst early-stage breast cancer patients at low contralateral breast cancer risk. We developed a CPM decision aid (DA) and conducted a pilot implementation. Methods: Surgeons and oncologists recruited eligible patients considering CPM. Consenting patients received the DA, completed a questionnaire and participated in a semi-structured interview. Clinicians were interviewed at study close. Results: Eleven clinicians and 31 patients participated. Three themes emerged: perceived utility and impact of the DA, disagreement regarding timing of delivery and target population, and implementation strategies. Both women and clinicians found the DA valuable, indicating it confirmed rather than changed preferences. Women (all of whom raised CPM themselves), preferred offering the DA early in treatment discussions whilst clinicians favoured targeting women who enquired about CPM. Conclusion: A DA about CPM is feasible and acceptable, but questions remain about the role of DAs in these types of decisions where one option has limited medical benefit. Practice implications: Some women have a high need to make an informed choice about CPM. Tools to support this could include a DA with a clear recommendation against CPM and an explanation why.
KW - Breast cancer
KW - Contralateral prophylactic mastectomy
KW - Decision aid
KW - Implementation
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85106625054&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2021.04.033
DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2021.04.033
M3 - Article
C2 - 34034935
AN - SCOPUS:85106625054
SN - 0738-3991
VL - 105
SP - 74
EP - 80
JO - Patient Education and Counseling
JF - Patient Education and Counseling
IS - 1
ER -
