Improving breast cancer surgical treatment decision making: The iCanDecide randomized clinical trial Journal Article


Authors: Hawley, S. T.; Li, Y.; An, L. C.; Resnicow, K.; Janz, N. K.; Sabel, M. S.; Ward, K. C.; Fagerlin, A.; Morrow, M.; Jagsi, R.; Hofer, T. P.; Katz, S. J.
Article Title: Improving breast cancer surgical treatment decision making: The iCanDecide randomized clinical trial
Abstract: Purpose: This study was conducted to determine the effect of iCanDecide, an interactive and tailored breast cancer treatment decision tool, on the rate of high-quality patient decisions - both informed and values concordant - regarding locoregional breast cancer treatment and on patient appraisal of decision making. Methods: We conducted a randomized clinical trial of newly diagnosed patients with early-stage breast cancer making locoregional treatment decisions. From 22 surgical practices, 537 patients were recruited and randomly assigned online to the iCanDecide interactive and tailored Web site (intervention) or the iCanDecide static Web site (control). Participants completed a baseline survey and were mailed a follow-up survey 4 to 5 weeks after enrollment to assess the primary outcome of a high-quality decision, which consisted of two components, high knowledge and values-concordant treatment, and secondary outcomes (decision preparation, deliberation, and subjective decision quality). Results: Patients in the intervention arm had higher odds of making a high-quality decision than did those in the control arm (odds ratio, 2.00; 95% CI, 1.37 to 2.92; P = .0004), which was driven primarily by differences in the rates of high knowledge between groups. The majority of patients in both arms made values-concordant treatment decisions (78.6% in the intervention arm and 81.4% in the control arm). More patients in the intervention arm had high decision preparation (estimate, 0.18; 95% CI, 0.02 to 0.34; P = .027), but there were no significant differences in the other decision appraisal outcomes. The effect of the intervention was similar for women who were leaning strongly toward a treatment option at enrollment compared with those who were not. Conclusion: The tailored and interactive iCanDecide Web site, which focused on knowledge building and values clarification, positively affected high-quality decisions largely by improving knowledge compared with static online information. To be effective, future patient-facing decision tools should be integrated into the clinical workflow to improve decision making. © 2018 by American Society of Clinical Oncology.
Keywords: adult; controlled study; patient satisfaction; cancer surgery; major clinical study; outcome assessment; follow up; breast cancer; mastectomy; randomized controlled trial; early cancer; multicenter study; shared decision making; human; female; priority journal; article
Journal Title: Journal of Clinical Oncology
Volume: 36
Issue: 7
ISSN: 0732-183X
Publisher: American Society of Clinical Oncology  
Date Published: 2018-03-01
Start Page: 659
End Page: 666
Language: English
DOI: 10.1200/jco.2017.74.8442
PROVIDER: scopus
PUBMED: 29364772
PMCID: PMC5946719
DOI/URL:
Notes: Article -- Export Date: 2 April 2018 -- Source: Scopus
Altmetric
Citation Impact
BMJ Impact Analytics
MSK Authors
  1. Monica Morrow
    772 Morrow