Factors influencing decision regret regarding placement of a PEG among substitute decision-makers of older persons in Japan: a prospective study

A tube feeding decision aid designed at the Ottawa Health Research Institute was specifically created for substitute decision-makers who must decide whether to allow placement of a percutaneous endoscopic gastrostomy (PEG) tube in a cognitively impaired older person. We developed a Japanese version and found that the decision aid promoted the decision-making process of substitute decision-makers to decrease decisional conflict and increase knowledge. However, the factors that influence decision regret among substitute decision-makers were not measured after the decision was made. The objective of this study was to explore the factors that influence decision regret among substitute decision-makers 6 months after using a decision aid for PEG placement.

In this prospective study, participants comprised substitute decision-makers for 45 inpatients aged 65 years and older who were being considered for placement of a PEG tube in hospitals, nursing homes and patients’ homes in Japan. The Decisional Conflict Scale (DCS) was used to evaluate decisional conflict among substitute decision-makers immediately after deciding whether to introduce tube feeding and the Decision Regret Scale (DRS) was used to evaluate decisional regret among substitute decision-makers 6 months after they made their decision. Normalized scores were evaluated and analysis of variance was used to compare groups.

The results of the multiple regression analysis suggest that PEG placement (P < .01) and decision conflict (P < .001) are explanatory factors of decision regret regarding placement of a PEG among substitute decision-makers.

PEG placement and decision conflict immediately after deciding whether to allow PEG placement have an influence on decision regret among substitute decision-makers after 6 months.