Skip to main content
Top
Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2015

Open Access 01-12-2015 | Research article

Impact of a decision aid on reducing uncertainty: pilot study of women in their 40s and screening mammography

Authors: Paula Scariati, Lisa Nelson, Lindsey Watson, Stephen Bedrick, Karen B. Eden

Published in: BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making | Issue 1/2015

Login to get access

Abstract

Background

In 2009 the United States Preventive Services Task Force updated its breast cancer screening guidelines to recommend that average-risk women obtain a screening mammogram every two years starting at age 50 instead of annually starting at age 40. Inconsistencies in data regarding the benefit versus risk of routine screening for women less than 50-years-of-age led to a second recommendation – that women in their forties engage in a shared decision making process with their provider to make an individualized choice about screening mammography that was right for them. In response, a web-based interactive mammography screening decision aid was developed and evaluated.

Methods

The decision aid was developed using an agile, iterative process. It was further honed based on feedback from clinical and technical subject matter experts. A convenience sample of 51 age- and risk-appropriate women was recruited to pilot the aid. Pre-post decisional conflict and screening choice was assessed.

Results

Women reported a significant reduction in overall decisional conflict after using the decision aid (Z = -5.3, p < 0.001). These participants also reported statistically significant reductions in each of the decisional conflict subscales: feeling uncertain (Z = -4.7, p < 0.001), feeling uninformed (Z = -5.2, p < 0.001), feeling unclear about values (Z = -5.0, p < 0.001), and feeling unsupported (Z = -4.0, p < 0.001). However, a woman’s intention to obtain a screening mammogram in the next 1-2 years was not significantly changed (Wilcoxon signed-rank Z = -1.508, p = 0.132).

Conclusion

This mammography screening decision aid brings value to patient care not by impacting what a woman chooses but by lending clarity to why or how she chooses it.
Appendix
Available only for authorised users
Literature
1.
go back to reference Murphy AM. Mammography screening for breast cancer: a view from 2 worlds (Editorial). JAMA. 2010;303:166–7.CrossRefPubMed Murphy AM. Mammography screening for breast cancer: a view from 2 worlds (Editorial). JAMA. 2010;303:166–7.CrossRefPubMed
2.
go back to reference Woolf SH. The 2009 breast cancer screening recommendation of the US Preventive Services Task Force (Editorial). JAMA. 2010;303:162–3.CrossRefPubMed Woolf SH. The 2009 breast cancer screening recommendation of the US Preventive Services Task Force (Editorial). JAMA. 2010;303:162–3.CrossRefPubMed
3.
go back to reference DeAngelis CD, Fontanarosa PB. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and breast cancer screening (Editorial). JAMA. 2010;303:172–3.CrossRefPubMed DeAngelis CD, Fontanarosa PB. U.S. Preventive Services Task Force and breast cancer screening (Editorial). JAMA. 2010;303:172–3.CrossRefPubMed
4.
5.
7.
go back to reference U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:716–6.CrossRef U.S. Preventive Services Task Force (USPSTF). Screening for breast cancer: U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommendation statement. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:716–6.CrossRef
8.
go back to reference Nelson HD, Tyne K, Bougatsos C, Chan BK, Humphrey L. Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:727–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Nelson HD, Tyne K, Bougatsos C, Chan BK, Humphrey L. Screening for breast cancer: an update for the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force. Ann Intern Med. 2009;151:727–37.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
10.
11.
13.
14.
go back to reference Joseph-Williams N, Evans R, Edwards A, Newcombe RG, Wright P, Grol R, et al. Supporting informed decision making online in 20 min: an observational web-log study of a PSA test decision aid. J Med Internet Res. 2010;12:e15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Joseph-Williams N, Evans R, Edwards A, Newcombe RG, Wright P, Grol R, et al. Supporting informed decision making online in 20 min: an observational web-log study of a PSA test decision aid. J Med Internet Res. 2010;12:e15.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
17.
go back to reference Qaseem A, Snow V, Sherif K, Aronson M, Weiss KB, Owens DK. Screening mammography for women 40 to 49 years of age: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:511–5.CrossRefPubMed Qaseem A, Snow V, Sherif K, Aronson M, Weiss KB, Owens DK. Screening mammography for women 40 to 49 years of age: a clinical practice guideline from the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:511–5.CrossRefPubMed
18.
go back to reference Armstrong K, Moye E, Williams S, Berlin JA, Reynolds EE. Screening mammography in women 40 to 49 years of age: a systematic review for the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:516–26.CrossRefPubMed Armstrong K, Moye E, Williams S, Berlin JA, Reynolds EE. Screening mammography in women 40 to 49 years of age: a systematic review for the American College of Physicians. Ann Intern Med. 2007;146:516–26.CrossRefPubMed
19.
go back to reference Amir E, Freedman OC, Seruga B, Evans D. Assessing women at high risk of breast cancer: a review of risk assessment models. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(10):680–91.CrossRefPubMed Amir E, Freedman OC, Seruga B, Evans D. Assessing women at high risk of breast cancer: a review of risk assessment models. J Natl Cancer Inst. 2010;102(10):680–91.CrossRefPubMed
20.
go back to reference Scariati P. Making choices about breast cancer screening: a decision aid for women between the ages of 38 and 48. Oregon: OHSU; 2011. Unpublished master’s thesis. Scariati P. Making choices about breast cancer screening: a decision aid for women between the ages of 38 and 48. Oregon: OHSU; 2011. Unpublished master’s thesis.
21.
22.
go back to reference Linder SK, Swank PR, Vernon SW, Mullen PD, Morgan RO, Volk RJ. Validity of a low literacy version of the decisional conflict scale. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;85:521–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Linder SK, Swank PR, Vernon SW, Mullen PD, Morgan RO, Volk RJ. Validity of a low literacy version of the decisional conflict scale. Patient Educ Couns. 2011;85:521–4.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
23.
go back to reference Kryworuchko J, Stacey D, Bennett C, Graham ID. Appraisal of primary outcome measures used in trials of patient decision support. Patient Educ Couns. 2008;73:497–503.CrossRefPubMed Kryworuchko J, Stacey D, Bennett C, Graham ID. Appraisal of primary outcome measures used in trials of patient decision support. Patient Educ Couns. 2008;73:497–503.CrossRefPubMed
26.
go back to reference Stacey C, O’Connor A, DeGrasse C, Verna S. Development and evaluation of a breast cancer prevention decision aid for higher risk women. Health Expect. 2003;6:3–18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral Stacey C, O’Connor A, DeGrasse C, Verna S. Development and evaluation of a breast cancer prevention decision aid for higher risk women. Health Expect. 2003;6:3–18.CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentral
Metadata
Title
Impact of a decision aid on reducing uncertainty: pilot study of women in their 40s and screening mammography
Authors
Paula Scariati
Lisa Nelson
Lindsey Watson
Stephen Bedrick
Karen B. Eden
Publication date
01-12-2015
Publisher
BioMed Central
Published in
BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making / Issue 1/2015
Electronic ISSN: 1472-6947
DOI
https://doi.org/10.1186/s12911-015-0210-2

Other articles of this Issue 1/2015

BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1/2015 Go to the issue