PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

Albert G Mulley

Publications and source records attributed to Albert G Mulley.

8 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

An approach to measuring the quality of breast cancer decisions.

OBJECTIVE: To explore an approach to measuring the quality of decisions made in the treatment of early stage breast cancer, focusing on patients' decision-specific knowledge and the concordance between patients' stated preferences for treatment outcomes and treatment received. METHODS: Candidate knowledge and value items were identified after an extensive review of the published literature as well as reports on 27 focus groups and 46 individual interviews with breast cancer survivors. Items were subjected to cognitive interviews with six additional patients. A preliminary decision quality measure consisting of five knowledge items and four value items was pilot tested with 35 breast cancer survivors who also completed the control preferences scale and the decisional conflict scale (DCS). RESULTS: Preference for control and knowledge did not vary by treatment. The mean of the participants' knowledge scores was 54%. There was no correlation between the knowledge scores and the informed subscale of the DCS (Pearson r = .152, n = 32, p = 0.408). Patients who preferred to keep their breast were over five times as likely to have breast-conserving surgery than those who did not (OR 5.33, 95% CI (1.2, 24.5), p = 0.06). Patients who wanted to avoid radiation were six times as likely to choose mastectomy than those who did not (OR 6.4, 95% CI (1.34, 30.61), p = 0.04). CONCLUSION: Measuring decision quality by assessing patients' decision-specific knowledge and concordance between their values and treatment received, is feasible and important. Further work is necessary to overcome the methodological challenges identified in this pilot work. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Guidelines for early stage breast cancer emphasize the importance of including patients' preferences in decisions about treatment. The ability of doctors and patients to make decisions that reflect the considered preferences of well-informed patients can and should be measured.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Developing skills for evidence-based surgery: ensuring that patients make informed decisions.

Ensuring that the surgical decisions made by and with patients are fully informed is a challenge. Doctors and patients must work together, and to be successful they need support in the form of knowledge management and decision aids. This article emphasizes the importance of eliciting and honoring patients' personal valuations of alternative future health states, their attitudes to the specific risks and risk differences that are central to surgical decisions,and their attitudes to time trade-offs. The skills and habits necessary to accomplish this critical objective begin with nothing less than a genuine concern for patients and an ability to relate to the unique meaning that the present illness and its treatment have in their lives.

Decision Making↗
PubMed2006

Doing the right thing: systems support for decision quality in cancer care.

BACKGROUND: There is considerable evidence of problems with the quality of cancer care. Wide variation in rates of interventions suggests that cancer care decisions may not reflect the preferences of informed patients. PURPOSE: To present a framework for systems support for improving the quality of decisions in cancer. METHODS: We outlined the types of decisions faced by cancer patients and categorized them based on the level of evidence available about effectiveness of choices and the amount of variation in patients' preferences for the key outcomes. Then we describe appropriate strategies to systematically improve the quality of decision making for each category. RESULTS: The types of decisions faced by cancer patients and providers are varied. The appropriate strategy to drive improvements differs for different decisions. For complex, preference-sensitive decisions, improvements in decision quality require increasing patients' knowledge and the match between patients' preferences and treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Decision making in cancer care is complex. Neither patients nor providers can make treatment decisions alone. System support is needed to improve the quality of decisions.

Choice Behavior↗
PubMed2005

Point of view.

Explore the source record for details and available documents.

Humans↗
PubMed2004

Policy support for patient-centered care: the need for measurable improvements in decision quality.

The phenomenon of practice variation draws attention to the need for better management of clinical decision making as a means of ensuring quality. Different policies to address variations, including guidelines and measures of appropriateness, have had little demonstrable impact on variation itself or on the underlying quality problems. Variations in rates of interventions raise questions about the patient-centeredness of decisions that determine what care is provided to whom. Policies that support the development and routine use of measures of decision quality will provide opportunities to measurably improve the quality of decisions, thereby leading to more patient-centered and efficient health care.

Decision Making↗
PubMed2003

Extending decision support: preparation and implementation.

The shift towards patient-centered care requires innovative, flexible decision-making models. Current decision aids provide information and help patients clarify values. By focusing almost exclusively on these two components, the aids miss some necessary elements that can improve decision quality. We discuss two such elements in this paper. First is avoiding the tendency to move into providing information about options and outcomes before adequate preparation. The second is the tendency to neglect to provide adequate implementation support.

Cooperative Behavior↗