Search

In 2017, the NYU Clinical and Translational Science Institute's Recruitment and Retention Unit created a Patient Advisory Council for Research (PACR) to provide feedback on clinical trials and health research studies. We collaborated with our clinical research informatics team to generate a random sample of patients, based on the International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision codes and demographic factors, for invitation via the patient portal. This approach yielded in a group that was diverse with regard to age, race/ethnicity, sex, and health conditions. This report highlights the benefits and limitations of using an electronic health record-based strategy to identify and recruit members for a PACR. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Ethical issues arise in the context of implementation science that may differ from those encountered in other research settings. This report, developed out of a workshop convened by the Center for Translation Research and Implementation Science within the United States National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, identifies six key themes that are important to the assessment of ethical dimensions of implementation science. First, addressing ethical challenges in implementation science does not require new ethical principles, commitments, or regulations. However, it does require understanding of the specific contexts arising in implementation research related to both study design and the intervention being implemented. Second, implementation research involves many different types of people in research, including patients, clinicians, administrators, the social networks of any of these, and the general population. These individuals play different roles that may entail different ethical considerations, obligations, and vulnerabilities. Third, the appropriateness of and need for informed consent in implementation research is connected to the role of the subject/participant, the nature of the intervention, and the design of the study. Even where traditional "full" consent processes are unnecessary or inappropriate, communication and engagement are critical. Similarly, even when research is exempt and informed consent unnecessary, Data Safety and Monitoring Board oversight of implementation studies may be advisable to ensure quality, address unexpected consequences, and identify overwhelming evidence of benefit. Fourth, implementation science is often explicitly designed to encourage specific behaviors and discourage others. There is a need for clarity regarding when efforts at behavioral change enhance or threaten autonomy and how to protect participants whose autonomy is threatened. Fifth, there is significant overlap between implementation science and quality improvement, and the ideal regulatory oversight structure for implementation science remains unclear. It is critical to encourage learning and growth while assuring appropriate protections. Sixth, implementation research takes place across a range of social and cultural contexts. Engagement and collaboration with stakeholders in designing and executing implementation trials and studies- especially when vulnerabilities exist- is essential. Attention to these themes will help ensure that implementation science fulfills its goal of advancing the practice of health care within a sound ethical framework. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: Symptom management among patients diagnosed with advanced cancer is a high priority in clinical care that often involves the support of a family caregiver. However, limited studies have examined parallel patient and caregiver symptom burden and associations with their own and each other's quality of life (QOL). This study seeks to identify patient and caregiver symptom clusters and investigate associations between identified clusters and demographic, clinical, and psychosocial factors (cognitive appraisals and QOL). Methods: This study was a secondary analysis of self-reported baseline survey data collected from a randomized clinical trial of 484 adult advanced cancer patients and their caregivers. Latent class analysis and factor analysis were used to identify symptom clusters. Bivariate statistics tested associations between symptom clusters and demographic, clinical, and psychosocial variables. Results: The most prevalent symptom for patients was energy loss/fatigue and for caregivers, mental distress. Low, moderate, and high symptom burden subgroups were identified at the patient, caregiver, and dyad level. Age, gender, race, income, chronic conditions, cancer type, and treatment type were associated with symptom burden subgroups. Higher symptom burden was associated with more negative appraisals of the cancer and caregiving experience, and poorer QOL (physical, social, emotional, functional, and overall QOL). Dyads whose caregivers had more chronic conditions were more likely to be in the high symptom burden subgroup. Conclusion: Patient and caregiver symptom burden influence their own and each other's QOL. These findings reinforce the need to approach symptom management from a dyadic perspective. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: By 2035, it is expected that older adults (aged 65 years and older) will outnumber children and will represent 78 million people in the US population. As the aging population continues to grow, it is critical to reduce disparities in their representation in medical research.Objective: This study aimed to describe sociodemographic characteristics and health and information behaviors as factors that influence US adults' interest in engaging in medical research, beyond participation as study subjects.Methods: Nationally representative cross-sectional data from the 2014 Health Information National Trends Survey (N=3677) were analyzed. Descriptive statistics and weighted multivariable logistic regression analyses were performed to assess predictors of one's interest in patient engagement in medical research. The independent variables included age, general health, income, race and ethnicity, education level, insurance status, marital status, and health information behaviors.Results: We examined the association between the independent variables and patient interest in engaging in medical research (PTEngage_Interested). Patient interest in engaging in medical research has a statistically significant association with age (adjusted P<.01). Younger adults (aged 18-34 years), lower middle-aged adults (aged 35-49 years), and higher middle-aged adults (aged 50-64 years) indicated interest at relatively the same frequency (29.08%, 29.56%, and 25.12%, respectively), but older adults (aged ≥65 years) expressed less interest (17.10%) than the other age groups. After the multivariate model was run, older adults (odds ratio 0.738, 95% CI 0.500-1.088) were found to be significantly less likely to be interested in engaging in medical research than adults aged 50 to 64 years. Regardless of age, the strongest correlation was found between interest in engaging in medical research and actively looking for health information (P<.001). Respondents who did not seek health information were significantly less likely than those who did seek health information to be interested in engaging in medical research.Conclusions: Patients' interest in engaging in medical research vary by age and information-seeking behaviors. As the aging population continues to grow, it is critical to reduce disparities in their representation in medical research. Interest in participatory research methods may reflect an opportunity for consumer health informatics technologies to improve the representation of older adults in future medical research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: The need to engage adults, age 65 and older, in clinical trials of conditions typical in older populations, (e.g. hypertension, diabetes mellitus, Alzheimer's disease and related dementia) is exponentially increasing. Older adults have been markedly underrepresented in clinical trials, often exacerbated by exclusionary study criteria as well as functional dependencies that preclude participation. Such dependencies may further exacerbate communication challenges. Consequently, the evidence of what works in subject recruitment is less generalizable to older populations, even more so for those from racial and ethnic minority and low-income communities.Methods: To support capacity of research staff, we developed a virtual, three station simulation (Group Objective Structured Clinical Experience-GOSCE) to teach research staff communication skills. This 2-h course included a discussion of challenges in recruiting older adults; skills practice with Standardized Participants (SPs) and faculty observer who provided immediate feedback; and debrief to highlight best practices. Each learner had opportunities for active learning and observational learning. Learners completed a retrospective pre-post survey about the experience. SP completed an 11-item communication checklist evaluating the learner on a series of established behaviorally anchored communication skills (29).Results: In the research staff survey, 92% reported the overall activity taught them something new; 98% reported it provided valuable feedback; 100% said they would like to participate again. In the SP evaluation there was significant variation: the percent well-done of items by case ranged from 25-85%.Conclusions: Results from this pilot suggest that GOSCEs are a (1) acceptable; (2) low cost; and (3) differentiating mechanism for training and assessing research staff in communication skills and structural competency necessary for participant research recruitment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Urologists role-played as patient and provider to learn shared decision-making (SDM) • They used the SHARE approach for prostate cancer screening and treatment decisions • Cases highlighted patient values more prevalent amongst underserved populations • Postworkshop, urologists' knowledge about SDM strategies increased • Urologists unanimously stated that the workshop met its objectives and was valuable. Shared decision-making (SDM) is an approach to patient-centered care that is strongly recommended when counseling patients for screening and treatment of prostate cancer. However, providers report lack of comfort with SDM and particularly in disparate populations. We report our experience designing and piloting an online workshop to educate practicing urologists on SDM in diverse populations. Our objective was to create a valued interactive SDM workshop to help urologists learn to lead SDM discussions with men form underserved populations. Therefore, we tested the hypothesis that urologists would agree or strongly agree that we met our learning objectives on postcourse survey. With the support of the American Urologic Association, we developed a case-based workshop with interactive role-playing to demonstrate and teach integration of SDM into clinical care. Cases were centered around screening and treatment decisions for localized prostate cancer in diverse patients. Brief surveys were used to track success with learning objectives and urologists' satisfaction with the workshop. The session included 14 participants from 6 countries. A postworkshop survey indicated that 100% of respondents (8 of 8) "strongly agreed" that the activity met learning objectives, and 100% rated the session as "good" (1), "very good" (1), or "excellent" (6). Participants' knowledge also improved on shared decision-making concepts and the knowledge was maintained one month after the workshop. We successfully created and piloted an interactive online workshop to improve urologists' comfort using shared decision-making in caring for diverse patient populations. The course met its objectives and participant feedback for the course was positive. Sharing this process and framework for development of this intervention may inform future workshops that can be applied to medical students, residents, and providers. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background Decision Aids ( DAs) effectively translate medical evidence for patients but are not routinely used in clinical practice. Little is known about how DAs are used during patient-clinician encounters. Objective To characterize the content and communicative function of high-quality DAs during diagnostic clinic visits for prostate cancer. Participants 252 men newly diagnosed with localized prostate cancer who had received a DA, 45 treating physicians at 4 US Veterans Administration urology clinics. Methods Qualitative analysis of transcribed audio recordings was used to inductively develop categories capturing content and function of all direct references to DAs (booklet talk). The presence or absence of any booklet talk per transcript was also calculated. Results Booklet talk occurred in 55% of transcripts. Content focused on surgical procedures (36%); treatment choice (22%); and clarifying risk classification (17%). The most common function of booklet talk was patient corroboration of physicians' explanations (42%), followed by either physician or patient acknowledgement that the patient had the booklet. Codes reflected the absence of DA use for shared decision-making. In regression analysis, predictors of booklet talk were fewer years of patient education ( P = .027) and more time in the encounter ( P = .027). Patient race, DA type, time reading the DA, physician informing quality and physician age did not predict booklet talk. Conclusions Results show that good decision aids, systematically provided to patients, appeared to function not to open up deliberations about how to balance benefits and harms of competing treatments, but rather to allow patients to ask narrow technical questions about recommended treatments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Objective: To identify possible predictors of older adults' preferences for stopping or continuing colorectal cancer (CRC) testing and satisfaction with medical visits., Methods: Cross-sectional, secondary analysis of patient data. The parent study was a two-arm, multi-site clustered randomized trial, assigning primary care physicians to receive shared decision making training plus a reminder, or reminders alone for patients who were due for CRC testing. For the current analysis, patient data were pooled and analyzed without regard to study arm. Patients were aged 76-85 years., Results: In total, 375 patients reported their preference: 74 % preferred continued testing while 26 % preferred no further testing. In multivariable models, patients were more likely to prefer CRC testing if they had more maximizing preferences for health care, higher anticipated regret at missing a diagnosis, and lower anticipated regret about colonoscopy complications. Patients were more likely to report being extremely satisfied with the visit with longer duration spent discussing testing options., Conclusion: Anticipated decision regret and medical maximizing were associated with preferences for CRC testing. Time spent discussing CRC testing was associated with visit satisfaction., Practice Implications: To support informed decision making, older adults should be given thorough information about CRC testing, treatments, and post-treatment follow up., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests/personal relationships which may be considered as potential competing interests: Karen Sepucha, Kathrene Valentine, Leigh Simmons, Kathleen Fairfield report financial support was provided by Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute (PCORI). If there are other authors, they declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. Dr. Sepucha reports grants from PCORI and Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, outside the submitted work during the conduct of the study. Dr. Simmons reports data advisory board participation and expert witness testimony, outside of submitted work., (Copyright © 2024 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Recruitment challenges in clinical research are widespread, particularly for traditionally under-represented groups. Referral relationships-in which research partners and clinical partners agree to collaborate on selected research studies or programmes, with the expectation that the clinical partners refer appropriate patients as potential participants-may help alleviate these challenges. Referral relationships allow research partners access to expanded and more diverse pools of participants by increasing the engagement of medical providers, leveraging providers' connections with patients and providing structural support for study participation. Clinical partners can also benefit from the resources offered by research involvement, and patients may benefit from improved access to studies. Yet despite their potential, referral relationships can raise ethical concerns. Here, we discuss ethical considerations for referral relationships in clinical research to address these concerns. When establishing relationships, fair participant selection should guide the sites and studies involved. When defining the terms of a relationship, partners should build trust and respect, collaborating so that health centres or hospitals and communities benefit from their research involvement with the mitigation of associated burdens. When implemented, referral relationships should continue to honour fair participant selection, reduce misunderstanding or miscommunication about research and protect patients' privacy and confidentiality. Overall, when conducted ethically, referral relationships can help address study recruitment challenges and promote fair access to research opportunities., Competing Interests: Competing interests: None declared., (© Author(s) (or their employer(s)) 2024. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ Group.)

Social media is widely used globally by patients, families of patients, health professionals, scientists, and other stakeholders who seek and share information related to cancer. Despite many benefits of social media for cancer care and research, there is also a substantial risk of exposure to misinformation, or inaccurate information about cancer. Types of misinformation vary from inaccurate information about cancer risk factors or unproven treatment options to conspiracy theories and public relations articles or advertisements appearing as reliable medical content. Many characteristics of social media networks-such as their extensive use and the relative ease it allows to share information quickly-facilitate the spread of misinformation. Research shows that inaccurate and misleading health-related posts on social media often get more views and engagement (e.g., likes, shares) from users compared with accurate information. Exposure to misinformation can have downstream implications for health-related attitudes and behaviors. However, combatting misinformation is a complex process that requires engagement from media platforms, scientific and health experts, governmental organizations, and the general public. Cancer experts, for example, should actively combat misinformation in real time and should disseminate evidence-based content on social media. Health professionals should give information prescriptions to patients and families and support health literacy. Patients and families should vet the quality of cancer information before acting upon it (e.g., by using publicly available checklists) and seek recommended resources from health care providers and trusted organizations. Future multidisciplinary research is needed to identify optimal ways of building resilience and combating misinformation across social media., (© 2024 The Author(s). CA: A Cancer Journal for Clinicians published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American Cancer Society.)

Decisions around prostate-specific antigen screening require a patient-centred approach, considering the benefits and risks of potential harm. Using shared decision-making (SDM) can improve men's knowledge and reduce decisional conflict. SDM is supported by evidence, but can be difficult to implement in clinical settings. An inclusive definition of SDM was used in order to determine the prevalence of SDM in prostate cancer screening decisions. Despite consensus among guidelines endorsing SDM practice, the prevalence of SDM occurring before the decision to undergo or forgo prostate-specific antigen testing varied between 11% and 98%, and was higher in studies in which SDM was self-reported by physicians than in patient-reported recollections and observed practices. The influence of trust and continuity in physician-patient relationships were identified as facilitators of SDM, whereas common barriers included limited appointment times and poor health literacy. Decision aids, which can help physicians to convey health information within a limited time frame and give patients increased autonomy over decisions, are underused and were not shown to clearly influence whether SDM occurs. Future studies should focus on methods to facilitate the use of SDM in clinical settings., (© 2024. Springer Nature Limited.)

Black men have a greater risk of prostate cancer as well as worse quality of life and more decisional regret after prostate cancer treatment compared to non-Hispanic White men. Furthermore, patients with prostate cancer who primarily obtain information on the internet have significantly more decisional regret compared to other information sources. Our objective was to explore the perspectives of Black patients on the use and impact of the internet for their prostate cancer care. In 2022-2023, we conducted seven virtual focus groups with Black patients with prostate cancer ( n = 22). Transcripts were independently analyzed by two experienced researchers using a constant comparative method. Online sources were commonly used by participants throughout their cancer journey, although informational needs varied over time. Patient factors affected use (e.g., physical health and experience with the internet), and family members played an active role in online information-seeking. The internet was used before and after visits to the doctor. Key topics that participants searched for online included nutrition and lifestyle, treatment options, and prostate cancer in Black men. Men reported many downstream benefits with internet use including feeling more empowered in decision-making, reducing anxiety about treatment and providing greater accountability for research. However, they also reported negative impacts such as feeling overwhelmed or discouraged sorting through the information to identify high-quality content that is personally relevant, as well as increased anxiety or loss of sleep from overuse. In summary, online sources have the potential to positively impact the cancer journey by reinforcing or supplementing information from health care providers, but can be harmful if the information is poor quality, not representative, or the internet is overused., Competing Interests: Declaration of Conflicting InterestsThe author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Introduction/purpose: Efforts to improve chronic disease outcomes among US adults highlight families, particularly support from families, as a key aspect of disease prevention and management. To date, however, an overwhelming focus on individual-level outcomes and unidirectional support (eg, from a family caregiver to an identified care recipient) belies the existence of co-occurring health concerns and interdependent care. There are increasing calls for more sophisticated and intensive family health interventions that better integrate family-level factors, processes, and outcomes to provide comprehensive family support services in health care and community-based settings., Methods: This commentary provides key considerations for advancing this work while centering family health equity and families themselves in health initiatives., Results: Several critical barriers are identified and discussed. For example, a narrow focus on family and inadequate measures of family-level disease burden make it challenging to understand how the disproportionate burden of chronic disease observed among individuals of lower socioeconomic status and certain racial and ethnic groups compounds and complicates family health experiences. In addition, limited attention to the interaction between individuals, families, and broader sociocultural factors that influence family resources and constraints, such as racism, hamper program design, implementation, and evaluation., Conclusion: To center families in efforts to reduce chronic disease disparities, it is necessary to move beyond superficial attention to the complexity of disease prevention and management within the family context. This commentary serves to enhance understanding of important drivers of family-level chronic disease outcomes, while providing important considerations for advancing research and practice., Competing Interests: Conflict of Interest: No conflicts of interest reported by authors.

Objective: To simultaneously explore associations between digital health, sociodemographic factors, and medical conditions on patient-centered communication (PCC). These are under-explored, yet important knowledge gaps to fill because perceived quality PCC may influence health information seeking behaviors and health outcomes., Methods: Data from the 2019 Health Information National Trends Survey were analyzed. The primary outcome was PCC, which was the summed score of 7 PCC-related questions. Factors of interest included whether participants used electronic methods to communicate with health professionals, age, gender, race/ethnicity, education, feelings about household income, and history of medical conditions. Descriptive statistics and linear regressions were conducted., Results: In the multivariate linear regression model, people aged 65-74 years compared with 18-34 year-olds, those with some college compared with college graduates, and those who felt they were living comfortably on their household income compared with all others reported higher PCC scores. People with a history of hypertension compared with those without reported higher PCC scores., Conclusion: Similar to past studies, sociodemographic factors were associated with PCC. A novel finding was that a history hypertension was associated with perceived quality of PCC., Practice Implications: This research may inform methods to enhance communication between patients and clinicians., Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper., (Copyright © 2023 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.)

Introduction: Colorectal cancer is a leading cause of cancer death in the U.S. Until 2021, the U.S. Preventive Services Task Force recommended colorectal cancer screening for all adults aged 50-75 years. Using a nationally representative sample, we explored the associations between having colorectal cancer screening and key sociodemographic and health-related factors among U.S. adults aged 50-75 years., Methods: We analyzed self-reported data from the National Cancer Institute's Health Information National Trends Survey 5 (Cycle 4) collected from February to June 2020. A multivariable weighted logistic regression model was conducted using all of the factors that were univariably significant with p <0.10. Using backward elimination, factors that were not significant with p >0.05 were removed one at a time until the remaining factors were all significant collectively with p <0.05., Results: Complete data were available for 1,649 respondents: 1,384 (81.2% weighted) had a colorectal cancer screening test, and 265 (18.8% weighted) did not. Multivariably, the odds of having had a colorectal cancer screening test increased with age (OR=1.07) and were higher for participants who identified as Black/African American than for White participants (OR=2.4), participants who had a family member who ever had cancer (OR=1.7), participants who believed that being overweight and obese influences development of cancer a lot than those who believed not at all (OR=2.0), and participants who had friends or family to talk with about health (OR=2.3)., Conclusions: Age, race, family history, weight-related beliefs about the causes of cancer, and having someone to talk with about health were associated with having colorectal cancer screening test., (© 2024 The Authors.)

Self-efficacy, or confidence, for being able to get cancer information may affect a person's understanding of cancer risk and subsequent cancer-related decisions such as screening, treatment, and genetic testing. In this study, we explored key correlates associated with self-efficacy for getting cancer information. We analyzed cross-sectional data from the 2018 Health Information National Trends Survey (HINTS 5, Cycle 2). There were 3504 responses in the full dataset; 2513 remained after eliminating respondents with incomplete data for all variables of interest. Self-efficacy for getting cancer information was assessed with the item, "Overall, how confident are you that you could get advice or information about cancer if you needed it?" First, we explored correlates associated with self-efficacy in getting cancer information including sociodemographic factors, patient-provider communication, and health-related self-efficacy in the full sample. Secondarily, we examined associations between self-efficacy to get cancer information and cancer information-seeking burden (e.g., difficulty understanding cancer information) in the subset of participants who reported ever looking for cancer-specific information. Descriptive statistics and logistic regressions were conducted. Asian race/ethnicity, higher perceived quality of patient-provider communication, and higher health-related self-efficacy were associated with higher odds of confidence about getting cancer information. In the subset of people who ever sought cancer-specific information, higher patient-provider communication scores, higher health-related self-efficacy, greater difficulty understanding information, greater concern about the quality of information, and greater frustration during the search were associated with higher self-efficacy for getting cancer information. Future research should evaluate strategies to improve cancer information seeking skills., (© 2023. The Author(s) under exclusive licence to American Association for Cancer Education.)

Objective: Substantial disparities exist in clinical trial participation, which is problematic in diseases such as lupus that disproportionately affect racial/ethnic minority populations. Our objective was to examine the effectiveness of an online educational course aiming to train medical providers to refer Black and Latino patients to lupus clinical trials (LCTs)., Methods: The American College of Rheumatology's Materials to Increase Minority Involvement in Clinical Trials (MIMICT) study used an online, randomized, 2-group, pretest/posttest design with medical and nursing providers of multiple specialties. We exposed intervention group participants to an education course, while the control group participants received no intervention. Controlling for the effects of participant characteristics, including specialty, and professional experience with lupus, we modeled relationships among exposure to the education course and changes in knowledge, attitudes, self-efficacy, and intentions to refer Black and Latino patients to LCTs. We also examined education course satisfaction., Results: Compared to the control group, the intervention group had significantly higher posttest scores for knowledge, self-efficacy, and intentions to refer Black and Latino patients to LCTs. Both medical and nursing trained intervention group participants had significantly higher mean posttest scores for knowledge and intentions to refer compared to the medical and nursing trained control group participants. Attitude was insignificant in analysis. The online education course, which received a favorable summary score, indicated that satisfaction and intentions to refer were strongly and positively correlated., Conclusion: The MIMICT education course is an effective method to educate medical providers about LCTs and to improve their intentions to refer Black and Latino patients., (© 2022 The Authors. Arthritis Care & Research published by Wiley Periodicals LLC on behalf of American College of Rheumatology.)

Objective: To develop and pilot test a patient decision aid (DA) describing small kidney masses and risks and benefits of treatment for the masses., Methods: An expert committee iteratively designed a small kidney mass DA, incorporating evidence-based risk communication and informational needs for treatment options and shared decision-making. After literature review and drafting content with the feedback of urologists, radiologists, and an internist, a rapid qualitative assessment was conducted using two patient focus groups to inform user-centered design. In a pilot study, 30 patients were randomized at the initial urologic consultation to receive the DA or existing institutional patient educational material (PEM). Preconsultation questionnaires captured patient knowledge and shared decision-making preferences. After review of the DA and subsequent clinician consultation, patients completed questionnaires on discussion content and satisfaction. Proportions between arms were compared using Fisher exact tests, and decision measures were compared using Mann-Whitney tests., Results: Patient informational needs included risk of tumor growth during active surveillance and ablation, significance of comorbidities, and posttreatment recovery. For the DA, 84% of patients viewed all content, and mean viewing time was 20 min. Significant improvements in knowledge about small mass risks and treatments were observed (mean total scores: 52.6% DA versus 22.3% PEM, P < .001). DA use also increased the proportion of patients discussing ablation (66.7% DA versus 18.2% PEM, P = .02). Decision satisfaction measures were similar in both arms., Discussion: Patients receiving a small kidney mass DA are likely to gain knowledge and preparedness to discuss all treatment options over standard educational materials., (Copyright © 2022 American College of Radiology. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Shared decision making (SDM) has been advocated to improve patient care, patient decision acceptance, patient-provider communication, patient motivation, adherence, and patient reported outcomes. Documentation of SDM is endorsed in several society guidelines and is a condition of reimbursement for selected cardiovascular and cardiac arrhythmia procedures. However, many clinicians argue that SDM already occurs with clinical encounter discussions or the process of obtaining informed consent and note the additional imposed workload of using and documenting decision aids without validated tools or evidence that they improve clinical outcomes. In reality, SDM is a process and can be done without decision tools, although the process may be variable. Also, SDM advocates counter that the low-risk process of SDM need not be held to the high bar of demonstrating clinical benefit and that increasing the quality of decision making should be sufficient. Our review leverages a multidisciplinary group of experts in cardiology, cardiac electrophysiology, epidemiology, and SDM, as well as a patient advocate. Our goal is to examine and assess SDM methodology, tools, and available evidence on outcomes in patients with heart rhythm disorders to help determine the value of SDM, assess its possible impact on electrophysiological procedures and cardiac arrhythmia management, better inform regulatory requirements, and identify gaps in knowledge and future needs.