Adapting the Breast Cancer Surgery Decision Quality Instrument for Lower Socioeconomic Status: Improving Readability, Acceptability, and Relevance

Author:

Durand Marie-Anne1,Song Julia1,Yen Renata West1ORCID,Sepucha Karen2ORCID,Politi Mary C.3ORCID,Dhage Shubhada4,Rosenkranz Kari5,Margenthaler Julie3,Tosteson Anna N. A.16,Crayton Eloise3,Jackson Sherrill3,Bradley Ann1,O’Malley A. James1,Volk Robert J.7ORCID,Ozanne Elissa8,Percac-Lima Sanja9,Acosta Jocelyn4,Mir Nageen3,Scalia Peter1ORCID,Ward Abigail1,Elwyn Glyn1

Affiliation:

1. The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy & Clinical Practice, Dartmouth College, Lebanon, New Hampshire

2. Division of General Internal Medicine, Massachusetts General Hospital, Boston, Massachusetts

3. Department of Surgery, Division of Public Health Sciences, Washington University School of Medicine, St. Louis, Missouri

4. Laura and Isaac Perlmutter Cancer Center, New York University School of Medicine, New York, New York

5. Dartmouth-Hitchcock Medical Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire

6. Norris Cotton Cancer Center, Lebanon, New Hampshire

7. Department of Health Services Research, The University of Texas MD Anderson Cancer Center, Houston, Texas

8. University of Utah, Salt Lake City, Utah

9. Massachusetts General Hospital’s Chelsea HealthCare Center, Chelsea, Massachusetts

Abstract

Introduction. Breast cancer is the second most common malignancy in women. The Decision Quality Instrument (DQI) measures the extent to which patients are informed and involved in breast surgery decisions and receive treatment that aligns with their preferences. There are limited data on the performance of the DQI in women of lower socioeconomic status (SES). Our aims were to 1) examine (and if necessary adapt) the readability, usability, and acceptability of the DQI and 2) explore whether it captures factors important to breast cancer surgery decisions among women of lower SES (relevance). Methods. We conducted semistructured cognitive interviews with women of lower SES (based on insurance status, income, and education) who had completed early-stage breast cancer treatments at three cancer centers. We used a two-step thematic analysis with dual independent coding. The study team (including Patient Partners and a Community Advisory Board) reviewed and refined suggested changes. The revised DQI was presented in two focus groups of breast cancer survivors. Results. We conducted 39 interviews. Participants found most parts of the DQI to be helpful and easy to understand. We made the following suggested changes: 1) added a glossary of key terms, 2) added two answer choices and an open text question in the goals and concerns subscale, 3) reworded the treatment intention question, and 4) revised the knowledge subscale instructions since several women disliked the wording and were unsure of what was expected. Discussion. The readability, usability, acceptability, and relevance of a measure that was primarily developed and validated in women of higher SES required adaptation for optimal use by women of lower SES. Further research will test these adaptations in lower SES populations.

Funder

Patient-Centered Outcomes Research Institute

Publisher

SAGE Publications

Subject

Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health,Health Policy

同舟云学术

1.学者识别学者识别

2.学术分析学术分析

3.人才评估人才评估

"同舟云学术"是以全球学者为主线,采集、加工和组织学术论文而形成的新型学术文献查询和分析系统,可以对全球学者进行文献检索和人才价值评估。用户可以通过关注某些学科领域的顶尖人物而持续追踪该领域的学科进展和研究前沿。经过近期的数据扩容,当前同舟云学术共收录了国内外主流学术期刊6万余种,收集的期刊论文及会议论文总量共计约1.5亿篇,并以每天添加12000余篇中外论文的速度递增。我们也可以为用户提供个性化、定制化的学者数据。欢迎来电咨询!咨询电话:010-8811{复制后删除}0370

www.globalauthorid.com

TOP

Copyright © 2019-2024 北京同舟云网络信息技术有限公司
京公网安备11010802033243号  京ICP备18003416号-3