Implementation, participation and satisfaction rates of a web-based decision support tool for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Lotte Keikes; Judith de Vos-Geelen; Jan Willem B de Groot; Cornelis J A Punt; Lieke H J Simkens; Marija Trajkovic-Vidakovic; Johanneke E A Portielje; Allert H Vos; Laurens V Beerepoot; Cornelis B Hunting; Miriam Koopman; Martijn G H van Oijen

doi:10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.020

Implementation, participation and satisfaction rates of a web-based decision support tool for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Lotte Keikes
, Judith de Vos-Geelen
, Jan Willem B de Groot
, Cornelis J A Punt
, Lieke H J Simkens
, Marija Trajkovic-Vidakovic
, Johanneke E A Portielje
, Allert H Vos
, Laurens V Beerepoot
, Cornelis B Hunting
, Miriam Koopman
, Martijn G H van Oijen

Research output: Contribution to journal › Article › Academic › peer-review

1 Downloads (Pure)

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: To examine implementation and patients' and providers' participation and satisfaction of a newly developed decision support tool (DST) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in palliative setting.

METHODS: Our DST consisted of a consultation sheet and web-based tailored information for mCRC treatment options. We conducted an implementation trajectory in 11 Dutch hospitals and evaluated implementation, participation and satisfaction rates.

RESULTS: Implementation rates fluctuated between 3 and 72 handed out (median:23) consultation sheets per hospital with patients' login rates between 36% and 83% (median:57%). The majority of patients (68%) had (intermediate)-high participation scores. The median time spent using the DST was 38 min (IQR:18-56) and was highest for questions concerning patients' perspective (5 min). Seventy-six% of patients were (very) satisfied. The provider DST rating was 7.8 (scale 1-10) and participation ranged between 25 and 100%. Remaining implementation thresholds included providers' treatment preferences, resistance against shared decision-making and (over)confidence in shared decision-making concepts already in use.

CONCLUSION: We implemented a DST with sufficient patient and oncologist satisfaction and high patient participation, but participation differed considerably between hospitals suggesting unequal adoption of our tool.

PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Requirements for structural implementation are to overcome remaining thresholds and increase awareness for additional decision support.

Original language	English
Pages (from-to)	1331-1335
Number of pages	5
Journal	Patient Education and Counseling
Volume	102
Issue number	7
DOIs	https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.020
Publication status	Published - Jul 2019

Keywords

Metastatic colorectal cancer
Decision support tool
Shared decision making
Patient values
Treatment preferences
Shared decision-making

Access to Document

10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.020

keikesFinal published version, 600 KBLicence: Taverne

Cite this

Keikes, L., de Vos-Geelen, J., de Groot, J. W. B., Punt, C. J. A., Simkens, L. H. J., Trajkovic-Vidakovic, M., Portielje, J. E. A., Vos, A. H., Beerepoot, L. V., Hunting, C. B., Koopman, M., & van Oijen, M. G. H. (2019). Implementation, participation and satisfaction rates of a web-based decision support tool for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer. Patient Education and Counseling, 102(7), 1331-1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.020

@article{1102589c1c02412bb85bfb77242c6041,

title = "Implementation, participation and satisfaction rates of a web-based decision support tool for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer",

abstract = "OBJECTIVE: To examine implementation and patients' and providers' participation and satisfaction of a newly developed decision support tool (DST) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in palliative setting.METHODS: Our DST consisted of a consultation sheet and web-based tailored information for mCRC treatment options. We conducted an implementation trajectory in 11 Dutch hospitals and evaluated implementation, participation and satisfaction rates.RESULTS: Implementation rates fluctuated between 3 and 72 handed out (median:23) consultation sheets per hospital with patients' login rates between 36\% and 83\% (median:57\%). The majority of patients (68\%) had (intermediate)-high participation scores. The median time spent using the DST was 38 min (IQR:18-56) and was highest for questions concerning patients' perspective (5 min). Seventy-six\% of patients were (very) satisfied. The provider DST rating was 7.8 (scale 1-10) and participation ranged between 25 and 100\%. Remaining implementation thresholds included providers' treatment preferences, resistance against shared decision-making and (over)confidence in shared decision-making concepts already in use.CONCLUSION: We implemented a DST with sufficient patient and oncologist satisfaction and high patient participation, but participation differed considerably between hospitals suggesting unequal adoption of our tool.PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Requirements for structural implementation are to overcome remaining thresholds and increase awareness for additional decision support.",

keywords = "Metastatic colorectal cancer, Decision support tool, Shared decision making, Patient values, Treatment preferences, Shared decision-making",

author = "Lotte Keikes and \{de Vos-Geelen\}, Judith and \{de Groot\}, \{Jan Willem B\} and Punt, \{Cornelis J A\} and Simkens, \{Lieke H J\} and Marija Trajkovic-Vidakovic and Portielje, \{Johanneke E A\} and Vos, \{Allert H\} and Beerepoot, \{Laurens V\} and Hunting, \{Cornelis B\} and Miriam Koopman and \{van Oijen\}, \{Martijn G H\}",

note = "Funding Information: This work was supported by the Dutch Digestive Foundation . Funding Information: Martijn G.H. van Oijen has received unrestricted research funding from Amgen, Bayer, Lilly, Merck-Serono, Nordic and Roche. Publisher Copyright: {\textcopyright} 2019 Elsevier B.V.",

year = "2019",

month = jul,

doi = "10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.020",

language = "English",

volume = "102",

pages = "1331--1335",

journal = "Patient Education and Counseling",

issn = "0738-3991",

publisher = "Elsevier Ireland Ltd",

number = "7",

}

Keikes, L, de Vos-Geelen, J, de Groot, JWB, Punt, CJA, Simkens, LHJ, Trajkovic-Vidakovic, M, Portielje, JEA, Vos, AH, Beerepoot, LV, Hunting, CB, Koopman, M & van Oijen, MGH 2019, 'Implementation, participation and satisfaction rates of a web-based decision support tool for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer', Patient Education and Counseling, vol. 102, no. 7, pp. 1331-1335. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.020

TY - JOUR

T1 - Implementation, participation and satisfaction rates of a web-based decision support tool for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

AU - Keikes, Lotte

AU - de Vos-Geelen, Judith

AU - de Groot, Jan Willem B

AU - Punt, Cornelis J A

AU - Simkens, Lieke H J

AU - Trajkovic-Vidakovic, Marija

AU - Portielje, Johanneke E A

AU - Vos, Allert H

AU - Beerepoot, Laurens V

AU - Hunting, Cornelis B

AU - Koopman, Miriam

AU - van Oijen, Martijn G H

N1 - Funding Information: This work was supported by the Dutch Digestive Foundation . Funding Information: Martijn G.H. van Oijen has received unrestricted research funding from Amgen, Bayer, Lilly, Merck-Serono, Nordic and Roche. Publisher Copyright: © 2019 Elsevier B.V.

PY - 2019/7

Y1 - 2019/7

N2 - OBJECTIVE: To examine implementation and patients' and providers' participation and satisfaction of a newly developed decision support tool (DST) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in palliative setting.METHODS: Our DST consisted of a consultation sheet and web-based tailored information for mCRC treatment options. We conducted an implementation trajectory in 11 Dutch hospitals and evaluated implementation, participation and satisfaction rates.RESULTS: Implementation rates fluctuated between 3 and 72 handed out (median:23) consultation sheets per hospital with patients' login rates between 36% and 83% (median:57%). The majority of patients (68%) had (intermediate)-high participation scores. The median time spent using the DST was 38 min (IQR:18-56) and was highest for questions concerning patients' perspective (5 min). Seventy-six% of patients were (very) satisfied. The provider DST rating was 7.8 (scale 1-10) and participation ranged between 25 and 100%. Remaining implementation thresholds included providers' treatment preferences, resistance against shared decision-making and (over)confidence in shared decision-making concepts already in use.CONCLUSION: We implemented a DST with sufficient patient and oncologist satisfaction and high patient participation, but participation differed considerably between hospitals suggesting unequal adoption of our tool.PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Requirements for structural implementation are to overcome remaining thresholds and increase awareness for additional decision support.

AB - OBJECTIVE: To examine implementation and patients' and providers' participation and satisfaction of a newly developed decision support tool (DST) for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) in palliative setting.METHODS: Our DST consisted of a consultation sheet and web-based tailored information for mCRC treatment options. We conducted an implementation trajectory in 11 Dutch hospitals and evaluated implementation, participation and satisfaction rates.RESULTS: Implementation rates fluctuated between 3 and 72 handed out (median:23) consultation sheets per hospital with patients' login rates between 36% and 83% (median:57%). The majority of patients (68%) had (intermediate)-high participation scores. The median time spent using the DST was 38 min (IQR:18-56) and was highest for questions concerning patients' perspective (5 min). Seventy-six% of patients were (very) satisfied. The provider DST rating was 7.8 (scale 1-10) and participation ranged between 25 and 100%. Remaining implementation thresholds included providers' treatment preferences, resistance against shared decision-making and (over)confidence in shared decision-making concepts already in use.CONCLUSION: We implemented a DST with sufficient patient and oncologist satisfaction and high patient participation, but participation differed considerably between hospitals suggesting unequal adoption of our tool.PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Requirements for structural implementation are to overcome remaining thresholds and increase awareness for additional decision support.

KW - Metastatic colorectal cancer

KW - Decision support tool

KW - Shared decision making

KW - Patient values

KW - Treatment preferences

KW - Shared decision-making

UR - https://www.scopus.com/pages/publications/85062356233

U2 - 10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.020

DO - 10.1016/j.pec.2019.02.020

M3 - Article

C2 - 30852117

SN - 0738-3991

VL - 102

SP - 1331

EP - 1335

JO - Patient Education and Counseling

JF - Patient Education and Counseling

IS - 7

ER -

Implementation, participation and satisfaction rates of a web-based decision support tool for patients with metastatic colorectal cancer

Abstract

Keywords

Access to Document

Other files and links

Fingerprint

Cite this