Back to Search Start Over

Understanding how a personalized risk prediction tool (VALUE-PERSARC) supports informed treatment decisions of soft-tissue sarcomas patients in daily clinical practice - A mixed methods study.

Authors :
Kruiswijk AA
Engelhardt EG
Vlug LAE
van de Wal RJP
Schrage YM
Haas RL
van de Sande MAJ
Marang-van de Mheen PJ
van Bodegom-Vos L
Source :
European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990) [Eur J Cancer] 2024 Oct; Vol. 210, pp. 114269. Date of Electronic Publication: 2024 Aug 09.
Publication Year :
2024

Abstract

Introduction: Risk prediction models (RPM) can help soft-tissue sarcoma(STS) patients and clinicians make informed treatment decisions by providing them with estimates of (disease-free) survival for different treatment options. However, it is unknown how RPMs are used in the clinical encounter to support decision-making. This study aimed to understand how a PERsonalised SARcoma Care (PERSARC) RPM is used to support treatment decisions and which barriers and facilitators influence its use in daily clinical practice.<br />Methods: A convergent mixed-methods design is used to understand how PERSARC is integrated in the clinical encounter in three Dutch sarcoma centers. Data were collected using qualitative interviews with STS patients (n = 15) and clinicians (n = 8), quantitative surveys (n = 50) and audiotaped consultations (n = 30). Qualitative data were analyzed using thematic analysis and integrated with quantitative data through merging guided by the SEIPS model.<br />Results: PERSARC was generally used to support clinicians' proposed treatment plan and not to help patients weigh available treatment options. Use of PERSARC in decision-making was hampered by clinician's doubts about whether there were multiple viable treatment options,the accuracy of risk estimates, and time constraints. On the other hand, use of PERSARC facilitated clinicians to estimate and communicate the expected benefit of adjuvant therapy to patients.<br />Conclusion: PERSARC was not used to support informed treatment decision-making in STS patients. Integrating RPMs into clinical consultations requires acknowledgement of their benefits in facilitating clinicians' estimation of the expected benefit of adjuvant therapies and information provision to patients, while also considering concerns regarding RPM quality and treatment options' viability.<br />Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare no conflicts of interest.<br /> (Copyright © 2024 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Ltd.. All rights reserved.)

Details

Language :
English
ISSN :
1879-0852
Volume :
210
Database :
MEDLINE
Journal :
European journal of cancer (Oxford, England : 1990)
Publication Type :
Academic Journal
Accession number :
39226665
Full Text :
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ejca.2024.114269